Definitely not working hard enough

haw · Post by **haw** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 5:29 am

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4713&item=7317116394&rd=1

I should be doing something more constructive than looking at ebay all day.

What's the story with this???

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 5:34 am

simple: you buy it, you get the shaft.

rickfan60 · Post by **rickfan60** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 7:44 am

It will probably be an invalid item soon........

aceonbass · Post by **aceonbass** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:19 am

These have come up before. Bill Wyman has played one. I think with the right parts out of the RIC catalog, this would be a pretty cool bass. I'm not quite sure if they violate RIC's trademark though since they never made a 330 bass.

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:07 am

I love how he says "not a Ricky copy" to try and get around it, and then says it sounds "better than the original". Puh-leeze!

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:10 am

Shaftsbury?!

Next to Salisbury?

bails · Post by **bails** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 5:12 pm

It most certainly is a violation of RIC trademark, despite RIC never producing a bass model of the 330. They own the 330 body shape, regardless of how it's used, so that even a Rickenbacker shaped coffee table is a trademark violation, because you are using RIC's property to sell your own. If you make a product, you can't steal other people's designs, even if they are for a different product or purpose.

rickenbrother · Post by **rickenbrother** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 5:21 pm

I think you are right Mark, or at least that's the way I think it should be.

morrow · Post by **morrow** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:52 am

....invalid item