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.
What would you do...?
- Thread starter Hot Rats
- Start date
For some reason, I read that as scratching of a non-fender decal. I suppose if it was a copy that had the decal, I'd scrape it off. That or toss tape over it because I'm lazy like that. 
"Eventually, the counterfeit will change hands. Knowlegde of it's original identity will be forgotten. It will take on the appearence of an original to all except the most knowledgeable. This, makes counterfeiting in the first place wrong. Why is this so hard to see?"
You kind of answered your own question here.
The question doesn't ask for people's opinions on what the morals are. I started a poll. An anonymous poll. a simple poll is all it is. There is no need for opionon other than yes or no. Why do people feel the need to explain anything beyond that.
1. With all due respect to the OP, it is pointless to start a thread on a public forum asking for people's opinions on a complex ethical issue without asking or expecting them to justify those opinions.
2. Appeals to "the law" in cases like this are intellectually lazy. They simply preempt the possibility of meaningful debate on an interesting ethical dilemma. "The law" in this country is a hodge-podge of rulings which embodies the ethical positions of a multitude of different authorities (local, state, federal) in many different times and places (from 18thC to now, from Alabama to New York). Ethically, it is thus full of contradictions, anomalies, and anachronisms. And all of it can be repealed. We should not let it do our thinking for us.
3. One can make a strong ethically defensible case for affixing Fender decals if one distinguishes between basses that are and are not authorized in some way by FMIC, eg., Squiers or basses made from, say, Fender-licensed Warmoth or Mighty Mite parts. It would be disingenuous of FMIC to claim that such basses or bass components cannot bear the "Fender" logo. Much of the value of these basses and components lies precisely in their "Fenderness," the Fender aesthetic of which the logo is such an essential part, the aesthetic from which Fender profits so handsomely. They cannot have it both ways.
4. Putting a Fender logo on a completely non-FMIC bass, like an MIJ lawsuit P-bass, is harder to defend ethically, and let's leave it at that.
2. Appeals to "the law" in cases like this are intellectually lazy. They simply preempt the possibility of meaningful debate on an interesting ethical dilemma. "The law" in this country is a hodge-podge of rulings which embodies the ethical positions of a multitude of different authorities (local, state, federal) in many different times and places (from 18thC to now, from Alabama to New York). Ethically, it is thus full of contradictions, anomalies, and anachronisms. And all of it can be repealed. We should not let it do our thinking for us.
3. One can make a strong ethically defensible case for affixing Fender decals if one distinguishes between basses that are and are not authorized in some way by FMIC, eg., Squiers or basses made from, say, Fender-licensed Warmoth or Mighty Mite parts. It would be disingenuous of FMIC to claim that such basses or bass components cannot bear the "Fender" logo. Much of the value of these basses and components lies precisely in their "Fenderness," the Fender aesthetic of which the logo is such an essential part, the aesthetic from which Fender profits so handsomely. They cannot have it both ways.
4. Putting a Fender logo on a completely non-FMIC bass, like an MIJ lawsuit P-bass, is harder to defend ethically, and let's leave it at that.
But what if Chevrolet was actually owned by Ferrari, and Ferrari made money from Chevvies precisely by making them visually identical to Ferraris? Would it be so wrong of me to put the horse logo on a Cavalier if it looked and ran almost exactly like a Ferrari Dino, and that likeness was its major selling point? And if Ferrari cried foul about this, wouldn't they seem just a little disingenuous? Their case may be legally sound under current law, but would it be ethically defensible?
...or, in the same vein, what about putting a Chevrolet emblem on and aftermarket fender (no pun intended) because the original rusted or became damaged... ? (body shops do this all the time,, & nobody thinks twice about it)
Wow. The voice of reason. Thank you as well for using moderation and avoiding the hyperbole.
I'd replace the decal with some 'suitable' wording of my own in a similar style (probably F**ker).
I certainly wouldn't try to fool people into thinking it was a Fender.
I certainly wouldn't try to fool people into thinking it was a Fender.
Yep, I wrote that. my question in the poll was "scratch it off or leave it on". I already know what I will do. I just wanted to see a simple percentage result. But, I see that it is too complex for some. Peace.
Gaolee
Official leathers tester and crash dummy
What? FMIC absolutely DOES deny the licensed parts manufacturers to put the Fender logo on the parts they make. AllParts, Mighty Mite, etc may manufacture necks and bodies that look like Fender parts, but they are not allowed to put "Fender" on any of those parts.
What is so hard to understand about this???
Muzoid said:
You shouldn't joke about Nazis . My mother was killed by Nazis years before I was born.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
De-fretting - How much fretboard chipping/removal is expected on a Jatoba neck?
- Latest: bass player 53
-
