Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
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.
Rickenbacker copy
- Thread starter rakov
- Start date
not a hater, a former owner. they are overpriced for what you get. they were a 500$ bass in the 80's and they are a 500$ bass now. there is nothing that special about them. they look and play very nice. just not 2000$ nice.
My 4002 cost me $1500 about 15 years ago, and it plays like a $3 to $5000 bass. It is regrettable that there are folks out there who do not appreciate what a really well set up Rick can do or how versatile they are.
Instead of learning about how the instrument really functions, most people simply want to trash mouth what they are ignorant of.
As far as Rick copy -- go get a cheap Fender copy instead. The US Courts have determined that Fender lost their trademark to the precision body shape, so no love lost.
On the other hand, Rick has protected its intellectual property rights to its body styles and such, so to purchase a copy of a Rickenbacker is to arguably commit an illegal act.
Instead of learning about how the instrument really functions, most people simply want to trash mouth what they are ignorant of.
As far as Rick copy -- go get a cheap Fender copy instead. The US Courts have determined that Fender lost their trademark to the precision body shape, so no love lost.
On the other hand, Rick has protected its intellectual property rights to its body styles and such, so to purchase a copy of a Rickenbacker is to arguably commit an illegal act.
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
Actually buying a Ric copy does not violate the trademark ... But selling one does.
If Rickenbacker had their way every single part of their instruments would be trademarked. Then you would have to pay them a royality if you have strings and pickups.
If Rickenbacker had their way every single part of their instruments would be trademarked. Then you would have to pay them a royality if you have strings and pickups.
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
Nope ... not even close ... I have owned 3 Rickenbacker 2030 basses and a 2020. All have bolt on necks and all have the Rickenbacker sound.
The pickup locations is the biggest factor, also the electronics, the woods and finishes also contribute.
I have a frankensteined Epiphone bass with pickups in the Ric positions and Rickenbacker electronics. It has a Rickenbacker tone despite having a bolt on neck and a plywood body.
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
The neck is maple and rosewood. Nobody would ever make a neck out of basswood, because it would fail. Basswood makes a good body. Ernie Ball uses it for the Bongo. I have owned a bass with a basswood body. It was fine. It makes for a nice light bass.
Late back with a response, but....
I have a real Rickenbacker, I've had it for ages.
However, just because I own a genuine Ric I didn't think that any obligation or responsibility for policing Rickenbacker's intellectual property rights, trademarks (or anything else for that matter) came along with the bill of sale - that's still up to Rickenbacker.
Neither do I think Rickenbacker ownership accords me the right to go around acting like some high-handed moral guardian on an internet forum, broadcasting my judgement on somebody's character when I know nothing else about them other than the fact that they expressed an interest in a Ric copy.
If, as you suggest, my livelihood derived from music publishing and others were selling it, then of course I would do whatever I could to prevent that, or negotiate an agreement, but I would expect to do that myself - not have the consumers of my product take up cudgels on my behalf.
I would actually like to have a decent backup for my '73 4001, since I've had it for such a long time and it has such personal value to me that I'm getting nervous about taking it to bar gigs with the attendent risk of having it damaged or stolen but, since I live in the UK and, to the best of my knowledge, live in a jurisdiction where copies of Rickenbackers are not illegal I don't feel any obligation to buy another very expensive, genuine Rickenbacker just for backup duties. If somebody made a worthy enough copy I would give it consideration (but more likely go for an Epiphone T-Bird Pro).
I don't think there are many trash talkers of Ric, rather, there are people who are interested in a copy for whatever reason and there are Ric owners who attack said people for whatever reason. This thread (and so many others) demonstrates this to a T.
Only in the US, which is the main point I made earlier. Buying one anywhere is not a crime.
500$ in 1980 based on inflation would be rougly 1400$ today, so, nice arguement mate.
Out of curiousity, if an American happened to be in the EU or UK and purchased such a bass, what would the legal implications of bringing it back to America be? Or having a London resident buy one and ship it to the States?
