I think that the only thing that illegal is to try to sell a copy of a Ric and claim that it's a real Ric. And on Ebay, you can't mention the name "Rickenbacker" anywhere in the title or auction.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
ID This Bad A*$ Ric Copy!
- Thread starter Quadzilla
- Start date
I think that the only thing that illegal is to try to sell a copy of a Ric and claim that it's a real Ric. And on Ebay, you can't mention the name "Rickenbacker" anywhere in the title or auction.
From what I understand, that's not so much a rule as a method for trying to hide from the Ric police. You'll get pulled if they find you selling a copy no matter how you list it.
So if you post any Ric copy up on Evil Bay and DON'T mention the name Riclenbacker, it can still get pulled?
I could be wrong, but that's how I understand it. Those selling stand the best chance of completing the transaction if they do it as a 3-day auction and use codewords such as "stereo bass" instead of specifically naming it. I know I've bid on a few copies that didn't name it, and the auctions never made it to completion.
I'm still confused
Is it legal to own a copy (that isn't passed off as the real thing) in the UK?
Especially a copy that only has vague similarities to the real thing
Is it legal to own a copy (that isn't passed off as the real thing) in the UK?
Especially a copy that only has vague similarities to the real thing
Hi.
Just a vaguely related question about the topic in hand.
WHY does every interesting thread about a Ric copies turn into a pissing contest and guesswork about the laws that varies from country to country???
More importantly:
WHO CARES.
I sure as hell don't.
Regards
Sam
Just a vaguely related question about the topic in hand.
WHY does every interesting thread about a Ric copies turn into a pissing contest and guesswork about the laws that varies from country to country???
More importantly:
WHO CARES.
I sure as hell don't.
Regards
Sam
Hi. Thanks for your... erm... input (?)
My question wasn't directed to you, and I CARE! Otherwise I wouldn't be asking. And it is related to the topic in hand, being about a Ric copy and all.
If you don't care, don't reply. Simples
Different people talk at length about different stuff because they find it interesting.
Plus it's winter and there's not a whole lot to do outside other than ski, and that's sort of expensive.
Here you can chat all you want. It don't cost noth'in.
Just courious, how many of you will come to visit me in the Federal Penatentery when they lock me up for all those Rickenfackers and Fackenbackers I've got stached away in my attic?
I don't think the everyday bass player has much to worry about. There's a heck of a lot of things that are a heck of a lot more pressing going on in the world than the fabrication and sale of a bass that looks like another one.
Does Ric have a right to protect their product? Sure they do. And if Ric gave the consumer what they wanted, on time, and at a reasonable price, there wouldn't even be any discussion regarding any of this.
Rickenbacker needs to spend more time making quality products, delivering them on-time, and making sure they have ample replacement parts in stock.
Plus it's winter and there's not a whole lot to do outside other than ski, and that's sort of expensive.
Here you can chat all you want. It don't cost noth'in.
Just courious, how many of you will come to visit me in the Federal Penatentery when they lock me up for all those Rickenfackers and Fackenbackers I've got stached away in my attic?
I don't think the everyday bass player has much to worry about. There's a heck of a lot of things that are a heck of a lot more pressing going on in the world than the fabrication and sale of a bass that looks like another one.
Does Ric have a right to protect their product? Sure they do. And if Ric gave the consumer what they wanted, on time, and at a reasonable price, there wouldn't even be any discussion regarding any of this.
Rickenbacker needs to spend more time making quality products, delivering them on-time, and making sure they have ample replacement parts in stock.
Hi.
Well neither was my answer directed towards You.
Perhaps my furstration is fueled by the fact that the current direction this thread has been going towards for a few pages now isn't really in line with the "STAY IN TOPIC" policy TB has. At least that's my feeling about it.
Or perhaps it's the fact that as far as I have searched for the TB archieves and also lately partcipated in vintage Ric copies discussions, they always turn into this direction. Before getting cleaned up and/or closed.
That's a shame, because these vintage instruments are close to peoples hearts, and not entirely because they're Ric copies, but because the craftmanship is up to par with the best of them. Regardless of the make.
Regards
Sam
Hi. Thanks for your... erm... input (?)
My question wasn't directed to you, and I CARE! Otherwise I wouldn't be asking. And it is related to the topic in hand, being about a Ric copy and all.
If you don't care, don't reply. Simples
Well neither was my answer directed towards You.
Perhaps my furstration is fueled by the fact that the current direction this thread has been going towards for a few pages now isn't really in line with the "STAY IN TOPIC" policy TB has. At least that's my feeling about it.
Or perhaps it's the fact that as far as I have searched for the TB archieves and also lately partcipated in vintage Ric copies discussions, they always turn into this direction. Before getting cleaned up and/or closed.
That's a shame, because these vintage instruments are close to peoples hearts, and not entirely because they're Ric copies, but because the craftmanship is up to par with the best of them. Regardless of the make.
Regards
Sam
The illegal thing is that a trademark infringing copy exists at all.
That makes it illegal to sell it.
Owning one is not technically illegal, unless you made it.
Making them is illegal.
Not just Rick copies, unlicensed copies of anything that is trademarked are illegal.
Passing a copy of anything off as the real thing is fraud.
Also illegal.
It's on topic insofar as I'm answering a direct question posted by another member, as to the original topic, the bass was ID'd and apppreciation for a nice piece of work was shown all 'round.
Many of the (Japanese) copies are very nice and quite well done. Some could fool even people quite familiar with the real article.
Most of the recently produced (Chinese) copies that I've seen are not, and wouldn't fool any but the greenest of newbs.
The legal issue with copies is wrapped up closely with their existence, having a separate discussion about these is rather hard. Sooner or later it comes up.
No argument with that.
They say they're working on it, but haven't made much of a dent in the backlog in the last 3 years, still hovering around the 2 year mark, but then people keep ordering the things no matter what.
Could be worse, the 4004 LKs usually took around 4 years to deliver!
That's pretty much my understanding of trademark laws. The key word is trade. You could make your own copy for personal use, but not for sale. Though of course Jon Hall could then chase you for copywrite infringement if he wanted.
But as I mentioned earlier, the UK doesn't seem to class the private sale of personal goods as trade for the purposes of trademark law. I read that on a site that seemed fairly authoritative on trademarks but, you know, it is the internet.
Sorry for going OT.
[/QUOTE]With all the discussion going on about copyright infringement, would this little honey qualify?
Where does one draw the line?
And may I add once again, I really like that bass!!
Hey, you been trawling through my photobucket account!!
They dont do a left handed version of it! That maybe tells you they know they are a bit close to the bone.. having said that, if you lay it next to a Ric its not actually THAT close, just makes a few nods towards it.
www.killer.jp love their stuff.. Our band owns a Ric, I refuse to play it (its got EMGs in it, it sounds like a bag of testicles), they have it just for the look, so I got this, has the llok, but sounds and plays great!
Hey, you been trawling through my photobucket account!!
They dont do a left handed version of it! That maybe tells you they know they are a bit close to the bone.. having said that, if you lay it next to a Ric its not actually THAT close, just makes a few nods towards it.
www.killer.jp love their stuff.. Our band owns a Ric, I refuse to play it (its got EMGs in it, it sounds like a bag of testicles), they have it just for the look, so I got this, has the llok, but sounds and plays great![/QUOTE]
I got this from a previous post you made a while back. I love this bass. I'd love to get one just because of the look! I did check out the site that sells them, whuch you provided me. I wish they were available here in the USA.
Hey, you been trawling through my photobucket account!!
They dont do a left handed version of it! That maybe tells you they know they are a bit close to the bone.. having said that, if you lay it next to a Ric its not actually THAT close, just makes a few nods towards it.
www.killer.jp love their stuff.. Our band owns a Ric, I refuse to play it (its got EMGs in it, it sounds like a bag of testicles), they have it just for the look, so I got this, has the llok, but sounds and plays great!
I got this from a previous post you made a while back. I love this bass. I'd love to get one just because of the look! I did check out the site that sells them, whuch you provided me. I wish they were available here in the USA.
www.kurosawagakki.com and www.ishibashi.co.jp can both sell them and will ship them to the US.
I bought what I thought was a Riki a few decades back, which ended up being one of those old MIJ lawsuit riki copies. I should have noticed the Made In Japan on the neck plate.
It really sucked, I mean it really did play and sound like poo. Looked cool though.
I still think that thing is a univox, either way I love the look. Hope it plays and sounds as good as it looks... Mine was so horrible I took it to a shop and put barts and a new bridge on it, ripped out the frets and coated over with polyurethane. It rocks now?
So does that make it a made in japan lawsuit raped by northwest white trash riki copy?
It really sucked, I mean it really did play and sound like poo. Looked cool though.
I still think that thing is a univox, either way I love the look. Hope it plays and sounds as good as it looks... Mine was so horrible I took it to a shop and put barts and a new bridge on it, ripped out the frets and coated over with polyurethane. It rocks now?
So does that make it a made in japan lawsuit raped by northwest white trash riki copy?
As to the subject of trademark infringement etc...If I was to build a bass for myself, and only myself who is to say I can't? Even if it is a dead ringer for something that is copyrighted or trademarked?
There was a thread here a while back where a TB'er built a dead nuts ringer for a Ricky, and the general thought was as long as he did not try to sell it it was fine. Copyrights and Trademarks mean someone cannot make your product, and sell it as yours and in some cases sell it as their own brand though it is a dead ringer for the real deal. Think lawsuit copies etc...
Also, if I was to build a dead ringer of a 4003 but had no name and Rick wanted to pursue me, I would make a total mockery of the judicial process and cost them a stink pot full of money for me owning something I built for personal use only.
I respect Ricks stance on copies, even if I do think it is a bit strong. It is their property, their design, so be it. However, I have to wonder how much money and resources are spent chasing ever average Joe who is selling a copy that could be used to step up QC or production etc..
Where I have a real issue is someone passing a copy off as an original, that is fraud and totally wrong.
That all said, I will have a Rick one day soon, it will be genuine and brand new.
There was a thread here a while back where a TB'er built a dead nuts ringer for a Ricky, and the general thought was as long as he did not try to sell it it was fine. Copyrights and Trademarks mean someone cannot make your product, and sell it as yours and in some cases sell it as their own brand though it is a dead ringer for the real deal. Think lawsuit copies etc...
Also, if I was to build a dead ringer of a 4003 but had no name and Rick wanted to pursue me, I would make a total mockery of the judicial process and cost them a stink pot full of money for me owning something I built for personal use only.
I respect Ricks stance on copies, even if I do think it is a bit strong. It is their property, their design, so be it. However, I have to wonder how much money and resources are spent chasing ever average Joe who is selling a copy that could be used to step up QC or production etc..
Where I have a real issue is someone passing a copy off as an original, that is fraud and totally wrong.
That all said, I will have a Rick one day soon, it will be genuine and brand new.
Well,...I guess if a group of private citizens feels a random company isn't managing itself according to their particular needs and desires,..that company should forfeit any copyright protections they have.
Wow, the times they are a changin'. :scowl:
