I'm afraid selling it - even as a copy - via legal sites could be a problem, cause RIC doesn't approve that. Anyway, good luck with the search!
PS: and welcome, Matija!
Real, or fake?
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Sounds like it turned out better than you could have hoped for, Matija! You made a real good friend out of what could have been a raw deal, and got the money back.
Don't be a stranger around here, as Ricks come up for sale at good prices all the time. All you have to do is watch for the color and features you want.
Don't be a stranger around here, as Ricks come up for sale at good prices all the time. All you have to do is watch for the color and features you want.
Re: Real, or fake?
And it looks like here is another one, this one has a very cleverly worded ad an e bay but when I asked him to send a few more pics they were very poor quality.
See what you make of it but I think its a fake (although it is a nice one)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-Bass ... dZViewItem
See what you make of it but I think its a fake (although it is a nice one)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-Bass ... dZViewItem
Re: Real, or fake?
It only has a single truss rod.v12al wrote:And it looks like here is another one, this one has a very cleverly worded ad an e bay but when I asked him to send a few more pics they were very poor quality.
See what you make of it but I think its a fake (although it is a nice one)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Rickenbacker-Bass ... dZViewItem
I think it's a Brazilian-made Giannini copy, with maybe some bits & pieces of genuine hardware. The Giannini copy is the only one I've seen which has the gap in the binding at the bottom of the body. The Fireglo looks wrong, too - other than that, it's quite lovely (some beautiful timber) and pretty convincing-looking.
Jon.
-
pflash4001
- Member
- Posts: 449
- Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 12:52 am
- Contact:
Re: Real, or fake?
The finish and the bridge p/u gave it away for me. Then I saw the shoddy work on the machine heads (notice how out of line they are from the back of the headstock) and was sure. Like was mentioned earlier, the guys here are the best source of info I have ever found anywhere. If you have a really detailed question, check with Dale Fortune. He did an incredible job on one of my Rics. I wasn't sure it would be able to be fixed, but I gigged that bass a few weeks ago. I love the job he did. Keep looking, one'll turn up.
Re: Real, or fake?
It has now been removed off e bay the day after my first post on here.
It was a really nice looking copy but hopefully this now means someone else did'nt end up buying a fake by accident even if it is a good one.
It was a really nice looking copy but hopefully this now means someone else did'nt end up buying a fake by accident even if it is a good one.
Re: Real, or fake?
I doubt it, Alan - it was probably bought by someone who knew it was a copy. He actually asked me if I would like to make a "reasonable offer" after the listing was removed (I declined), and also made the same offer to some members of a UK bass forum where it was also being discussed.
What's good is that this demonstrates how difficult it is for even a convincing fake to sell without being recognised for what it is - I have no objection to these things being sold as vintage copies from the "lawsuit era" (I'm something of a collector/enthusiast of the Japanese copy era) but for a variety of reasons, fobbing them off as the genuine article infuriates me.
J.
What's good is that this demonstrates how difficult it is for even a convincing fake to sell without being recognised for what it is - I have no objection to these things being sold as vintage copies from the "lawsuit era" (I'm something of a collector/enthusiast of the Japanese copy era) but for a variety of reasons, fobbing them off as the genuine article infuriates me.
J.
Re: Real, or fake?
I agree totally, some of those copys are actually good basses and as long as they are sold as vintage copies there shold never be a problem.
I have owned a few over the years myself but to try and sell one as the real thing makes my blood boil.
He never e mailed me back tho so I assume he sold it, at least he sounds like he came clean in the end about it.
I have owned a few over the years myself but to try and sell one as the real thing makes my blood boil.
He never e mailed me back tho so I assume he sold it, at least he sounds like he came clean in the end about it.
Re: Real, or fake?
It's been discussed a million times before, but passing off fakes as either copies or genuine Rickenbackers is not the issue.
All Rickenbacker guitar shapes and designs are owned by RIC, and cannot be legally copied regardless of whether they are labelled as genuine or as copies.
Fraud is not the main concern here, but theft of intellectual property - and it doesn't matter whether a few individuals don't see an issue with stealing, because it is still against the law in every country in the world.
Don't steal from people you know, don't steal from people you don't, and don't steal from RIC.
All Rickenbacker guitar shapes and designs are owned by RIC, and cannot be legally copied regardless of whether they are labelled as genuine or as copies.
Fraud is not the main concern here, but theft of intellectual property - and it doesn't matter whether a few individuals don't see an issue with stealing, because it is still against the law in every country in the world.
Don't steal from people you know, don't steal from people you don't, and don't steal from RIC.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights do make a left.
Re: Real, or fake?
Except China, apparently.bails wrote:Fraud is not the main concern here, but theft of intellectual property - because it is still against the law in every country in the world.
Re: Real, or fake?
It is against the law in China, they just don't enforce it, much to the annoyance of the rest of the corporate world.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights do make a left.
Re: Real, or fake?
Nah, thay just have to be taught to play nice if they want to play in the sandbox.
Ha! You type faster than me, Mark!
Ha! You type faster than me, Mark!
Re: Real, or fake?
bails wrote:It's been discussed a million times before, but passing off fakes as either copies or genuine Rickenbackers is not the issue.
All Rickenbacker guitar shapes and designs are owned by RIC, and cannot be legally copied regardless of whether they are labelled as genuine or as copies.
Fraud is not the main concern here, but theft of intellectual property - and it doesn't matter whether a few individuals don't see an issue with stealing, because it is still against the law in every country in the world.
Don't steal from people you know, don't steal from people you don't, and don't steal from RIC.
Again I have to agree but you have to also look at it in a different way sometimes.
When it was going on in the 80's, was it a problem? I feel it was more that there where a few people who couldn't afford a ric but loved the style and the sound and at the time they suddenly had the chance to do it if they could buy a cheap copy that was near to what they wanted.
I was certainly one of those people at the time and my first 3 ric's were copys (all of them good ones too) and it made me determined to go on to live the dream, I have now owned at least 7 real ones as a result.
I think sometimes it can be good for a company and I think it is only in recent years it has become a problem with ric's.
Here's something interesting... what do ya make of this???
- Attachments
-
Re: Real, or fake?
I can see what you are saying, and you do have a point, but the fact remains that:
"All Rickenbacker guitar shapes and designs are owned by RIC, and cannot be legally copied regardless of whether they are labelled as genuine or as copies."
Additionally, RIC owned designs and trademarks cannot be used to give people a chance "to buy a cheap copy that was near to what they wanted" or to encourage people to "go on to live the dream" or any other excuse for theft that we can think of.
Theft is theft, and I, for one, think it's wrong. I don't need to justify it, because I just don't do it!
That said, I do understand that most people don't realise it's a case of theft until it is explained to them...
Gibson and Fender don't own most of the body shapes they use because they failed to protect their trademarks. Copying a Stratocaster is not theft because that design is now in the public domain, and so no one specifically owns it. Rickenbacker designs, on the other hand, have always been owned and rigorously protected by RIC, meaning a Rickenbacker copy (regardless of anyone's justification) is trademark infringing, and amounts to theft of intellectual design property from RIC. Doesn't matter where it came from, doesn't matter how it's labelled, doesn't matter how well it's made, doesn't matter what parts it uses, doesn't matter how much it costs, doesn't matter whether RIC will actually prosecute or not, it's still stolen property!
P.S. As far as the Countach goes, I can only assume that Lamborghini owns the trademark shape of this vehicle, and therefore this car is using a stolen design. If, on the other hand, the Countach design is public domain, then, where do I get one, how much do they cost and can I have it sent to Australia?
"All Rickenbacker guitar shapes and designs are owned by RIC, and cannot be legally copied regardless of whether they are labelled as genuine or as copies."
Additionally, RIC owned designs and trademarks cannot be used to give people a chance "to buy a cheap copy that was near to what they wanted" or to encourage people to "go on to live the dream" or any other excuse for theft that we can think of.
Theft is theft, and I, for one, think it's wrong. I don't need to justify it, because I just don't do it!
That said, I do understand that most people don't realise it's a case of theft until it is explained to them...
Gibson and Fender don't own most of the body shapes they use because they failed to protect their trademarks. Copying a Stratocaster is not theft because that design is now in the public domain, and so no one specifically owns it. Rickenbacker designs, on the other hand, have always been owned and rigorously protected by RIC, meaning a Rickenbacker copy (regardless of anyone's justification) is trademark infringing, and amounts to theft of intellectual design property from RIC. Doesn't matter where it came from, doesn't matter how it's labelled, doesn't matter how well it's made, doesn't matter what parts it uses, doesn't matter how much it costs, doesn't matter whether RIC will actually prosecute or not, it's still stolen property!
P.S. As far as the Countach goes, I can only assume that Lamborghini owns the trademark shape of this vehicle, and therefore this car is using a stolen design. If, on the other hand, the Countach design is public domain, then, where do I get one, how much do they cost and can I have it sent to Australia?
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights do make a left.
Re: Real, or fake?
"what do ya make of this???"
Very offensive!
I can't believe you put that monstrosity in front of that gorgeous 365GTB/4 in your photograph!!!
Very offensive!
I can't believe you put that monstrosity in front of that gorgeous 365GTB/4 in your photograph!!!