Rickenbacker & Fakenbacher in the Same Store?

leesh · Post by **leesh** » Tue May 09, 2006 10:13 am

I don't want to be a Narc or anything but I was recently in the shop of an authorized Rickenbacker dealer and right next to all the rickenbackers was a rickenbacker copy, advertised as such... What is everyone's opinions on this? I just think that's a little weird....I'm not necessarily offended or anything...I just don't think that's right.

incubus2432 · Post by **incubus2432** » Tue May 09, 2006 10:29 am

I have no problem with it as long as they aren't trying to pass it off as the real thing which, as you stated, they are not. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't buy it but I have no problem with them selling it. I actually think the knock-offs are kinda cool....just not my thing.

leftyguitars · Post by **leftyguitars** » Tue May 09, 2006 11:24 am

I don't see a problem, as long as it says what it is. After all most kids start out with a copy of some sort and aspire to the real thing when they can afford it. If there ware no cheap (but interesting) guitars as "first rungs" many would never get up the ladder of ownership.

bails · Post by **bails** » Tue May 09, 2006 10:49 pm

Not sure why we still have these kind of discussions, because producing and/or selling a fake Rickenbacker is a trademark violation, and it makes no difference how the infringing product is labelled, or whether the above people do not see or have a problem with it!

red_rob · Post by **red_rob** » Tue May 09, 2006 11:31 pm

I'm no copyright lawyer but I'm pretty sure that, by definition, if none of the registered trademarks are violated, then there is no trademark violation. Or am I missing something?

As long as products abide by the law and are clearly labelled, then I agree with Peter and Brian.

My first guitar as a kid was a Les Paul copy. I was 15 and couldn't afford a '59 flame top...

bails · Post by **bails** » Wed May 10, 2006 12:49 am

You cannot possibly make a Rickenbacker 'copy' without violating one of RIC's trademarks.
If you could achieve this feat, then the resultant guitar wouldn't look anything like a Rickenbacker, and therefore it wouldn't be a Rickenbacker 'copy'.

reductio ad absurdum

leftyguitars · Post by **leftyguitars** » Wed May 10, 2006 1:01 am

I don't know what the law is in other countries but here in the UK you can sell whatever you want as long as it doesn't pretend to be something that it is not (that is you can't sell counterfeit but you can sell a copy), and is fit for the purpose for which it is sold. Copies have been legally sold here since the year dot.

red_rob · Post by **red_rob** » Wed May 10, 2006 1:06 am

Are you ok with fender/gibson/etc copies then Mark?

bails · Post by **bails** » Wed May 10, 2006 1:28 am

Peter: I should have qualified may last post. As you have indicated, recognition of Trademarks is most certainly, and obviously country dependant. I doubt it is illegal to sell Rickenbacker copies in The Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe, or likewise in Chad*, but it does surprise me that the UK does not recognise these as trademark infringing.

Robert: Gibson and Fender copies are fine, as long as they don't infringe on either of those companies trademarks. I could be wrong, but I believe most of thier older guitar shapes are not trademarked, because by the time they realised a need for it, they had missed thier chance. Unlike Gibson and Fender, Rickenbacker has always defended its trademarks, making the situation quite different.

*Note: My sincerest apology to any forumites who are native citizens of either The Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe, or Chad.

red_rob · Post by **red_rob** » Wed May 10, 2006 2:33 am

Well you learn something new everyday. I'd love to hear the official line on this.

The Rickenbacker copies *can't* be illegal in the UK, because you see the bloody things often enough in "reputable" shops (as evidenced from the below picture, which I've posted before, of one of the larger guitar shops in London).

"Rockinbetter" is the name on the TRC...

cmuk · Post by **cmuk** » Wed May 10, 2006 3:06 am

Wow! An RM1993 with neck binding for less than £300. Cool!

Just kidding...

leftyguitars · Post by **leftyguitars** » Wed May 10, 2006 3:26 am

And a lefty one too!

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed May 10, 2006 3:32 am

Robert: This is an interesting topic for discussion. Your photo is a good example of what is taking place in the marketplace everyday.

Not withstanding the fact that these instruments can be legally sold, if anyone of us was shown this photo for just a second and asked to associate a single word with it, surely it would be "Rickenbacker." Of course, that is the point.

Upon further reflection we would realise that the guitars are copies, however, the body shape, pickup look, tone knob configuration, pickguard, sound hole, headstock and truss rod shape and so forth are copies of Rickenbacker. The public, however, may not reach this conclusion.

For me, this practice is about capitalizing on the design features of someone else's work and then using their good ideas for gain. While not a perfect analogy, I think of this practice as a form of plagiarism.

It may be a perfectly legal way to make a living but to my way of thinking the practice is unethical when a company produces a guitar with the intent of passing it off in the image of a Rickenbacker.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Wed May 10, 2006 3:50 am

I've joined this discussion late, because my e-mail list organizes itself alphabetically and "R" found itself near the end on a busy day...

Peter's post (above) sums up my own feelings on this matter perfectly. Bails adds the icing. Both have kept my own blood pressure down. Thanks, guys!

Everyone, of course, is entitled to an opinion, but the opinion of the law--the only one that really counts in the end--is that things like this are actionable and that RIC deserves trade protection from those who would capitalize upon the fruits of the labors of others.

That makes those who produce these things, thieves and those who would sell them knowingly, pimps.

leftyguitars · Post by **leftyguitars** » Wed May 10, 2006 3:56 am

Peter I agree with what you are saying but here are two points...

Upon further reflection we would realise that the guitars are copies, however, the body shape, pickup look, tone knob configuration, pickguard, sound hole, headstock and truss rod shape and so forth are copies of Rickenbacker. The public, however, may not reach this conclusion.

I don't totally agree with this because anybody who new enough about Rickenbackers to want to buy one would know that it wasn't one (regarding a copy that is).

My second point, over here (and possibly there too) there are multi-million £££ businesses making and selling Pattern (read "identical copy") consumer parts (filters, exhausts, etc.) and body parts for cars. Ford, GM and the rest of the manufacturers know that it is happening but it can't be stopped. So we (in the UK) have the option of paying £££££ for a genuine (say) Ford part or ££ for a pattern part which may or may not be as good as the original. It is an open market with these items actively advertised and displayed in retail and trade shops.