A little Ric-like project

telebob · Post by **telebob** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 2:23 pm

Hi, just wanted to share a little project I'm working on. I own a new Ric 360 and love the sound. In my opinion the 360 is one of the most beautiful guitars ever made. As much as I dig my 360, there a few things I'd like to have different on it. Here's a couple of Rics I'm building from scratch which incorporate the changes I like. I do not build guitars for sale. I only build them for my own personal collection.

winston · Post by **winston** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:28 pm

Amazing and impressive looking work Bob.

However, just a word to the wise. RIC may not be very impressed with your disclosure here, since your work closely emulates their design which is considered to be intellectual property and that is something that they vigorously defend when they become aware of any infringement of their trade dress.

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:58 pm

What he said.

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 5:07 pm

I've been there...

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 5:42 pm

Oh, it's ok. He's a photographer and writer- and he doesn't mind at all if you borrow his photos and articles to dress up your website, for instance, just for your personal use. These might be good for your bike club newsletter too, since you're not going to be selling them, after all.

telebob · Post by **telebob** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:40 am

hmmmmmm. In my experience, there are a lot of creative people involved in music who build their own instruments and share their work with others. It has been my understanding that we learn from eachother when sharing this information and it helps us further our knowledge and experience in our field of interest.

Truth be told, this project was started because as much as I love the Ric 360, they are not manufactured with a neck width and shape that is suitable to my playing style. After contacting the company, I was told that they do not take custom orders. My work is a sort of tribute to an excellent guitar that unfortunately doesn't suit my playing style as much as I'd like.

Throughout the guitar world, people do this type of work and share it with others openly because we find it to be cool, interesting and inspiring. That is the spirit in which I'm sharing this project. It surprises me a little that there is a more ominous response here as compared other music forums which are equally dedicated to their particular brands.

I apologize if this work is in some way offensive to the people here. It is presented in a good natured way and thought you guys might enjoy seeing the project. If that is not the case I will gladly remove my post.

Edit: I just learned that I cannot edit my first post. If the type of information I've presented here is somehow inappropriate, please excuse the intrusion. I will not make any further reference to it.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:08 am

Bob: Thanks for your willingness to share information here.

That such projects based on other companies' designs go unchallenged stems from the fact that these corporations have not enforced their trademarks over the years and as such are no longer able to take action. While some consider that these companies don't care, it is closer to the truth that there objections would fall on "deaf legal ears" at this point.

RIC has defended their trademarks over the years, which makes their situation very different from other companies. While it is appreciated that you wish this guitar to go no further, in the long run an instrument such as yours could easily be passed off as the genuine article. For this reason, RIC needs to step in. These designs have been created through considerable time, effort, money and creative thought. As you can imagine, the company wishes to protect this investment. This, in my view, is one of the reasons why your work presented here is met with concern and chagrin.

Sometimes talented builders do not give their projects much thought beyond the original intention of the work. That you felt strongly enough to create your own is a good example of why RIC needs to protect its trademarks. It is, food for thought.

telebob · Post by **telebob** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:06 am

Thanks for the explanation Peter. As it is not my intent to get people ruffled here, I'd like to ask, out of respect for the company's position, that you pull my photo links. No sense in getting anyone upset. That certainly is not my intention. I just come from a different mind set. I have mentored several people in my field of expertise (photography) over the years and continue to do so even though some claim I'm "giving up my job security." I don't look at it that way. I'm just coming from the position of, the more we help each other, the less we'll be fighting each other. Sorry for the disruption.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:12 am

Bob: Links removed as requested.

Please don't let this be the end of your involvement on this Forum. Your experience as a photographer and builder is valuable, within the context of the parameters discussed above regarding Rickenbacker and in other respects involving other makes.

telebob · Post by **telebob** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:17 am

Right on Peter. Always a pleasure to come to a mutual understanding.

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:53 am

Bob, no problem with the work you have done, obviously skilled and excellent work, it's just that in this case, it's not a good thing to copy a Rick, because they do and will enforce their copyrights.
We are normally a very cheerful and friendly bunch!

ken_j · Post by **ken_j** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:18 am

Welcome to the forum Bob.

telebob · Post by **telebob** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:55 am

Understood. Thanks, I look forward to lively discussion on many other topics. It's actually good to see such fierce brand loyalty in guitars!

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:59 am

Coming in late to this discussion (which is unusual for me...) I never got the chance to see Bob's work, but have to assume that it is, for all practical purposes, a Rick 360 with a wider neck.

It also seems to me that John Hall's remarks were passed over.

Bob, if someone else were to take your photos without permission and post them somewhere else without published credit, that would be bad enough.

If, through some combination of circumstances beyond your control, another party was to take those uncredited photos and print them, or turn them into greeting cards, or use them without paying an insertion fee, in a national ad campaign, you would have a situation that would be actionable on your part.

Rickenbacker has spent decades and untold man-hours and talent-hours, building, supporting, reinforcing, and (yes...) defending their brand against any who would attempt to shortcut the unauthorized use of their trademarks, copyrights, and trade dress.

It ain't like Teles, Strats, or Les Pauls...the company has remained in the same hands for much of its life, and certainly for the entire history of its currently-popular product line. This continuous connection has assured that protection was sought and was never allowed to lapse, unlike the Teles and Strats out there.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:43 am

I agree Paul. John Hall's comments with regard to photos were not addressed directly and I consider that RIC has been served well by your discussion here.