NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

[Funkfingers]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

Like several of Nathan's other NGD threads, this one exhibits a clear generational gap.

The young turk is enjoying the thrill of acquisition. More is more - even if it turns out to be more "brown" stuff.

The more experienced contributors concur that, often, one seriously good electric guitar trounces the imagined capabilities of numerous budget bargains.

We learn by our mistakes. Too bad that this can become expensive.

In an ideal world, one would leapfrog two generations in a single bound by arranging for Nathan (GF) to meet forum legend, wahwah. (Eight fingers, two thumbs, one Stratocaster!)

 

[Johnny the Kid]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

Like several of Nathan's other NGD threads, this one exhibits a clear generational gap.

The young turk is enjoying the thrill of acquisition. More is more - even if it turns out to be more "brown" stuff.

The more experienced contributors concur that, often, one seriously good electric guitar trounces the imagined capabilities of numerous budget bargains.

We learn by our mistakes. Too bad that this can become expensive.

In an ideal world, one would leapfrog two generations in a single bound by arranging for Nathan (GF) to meet forum legend, wahwah. (Eight fingers, two thumbs, one Stratocaster!)

I don't care about that fact that he owns a bunch of cheap guitars. The issue is that he's admitting to buying a counterfeit Gibson guitar. We had this same discussion just a little bit ago when MetalManiac needed help identifying a Chibson. If GuitarFanatic had bought a Tokai or a Burny, we wouldn't care because those companies make LP copies, but don't claim to be Gibsons. But the fact that he knowingly bought an obvious counterfeit is not cool, whether he was gonna mod it or keep it stock.

 

[Securb]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I don't care about that fact that he owns a bunch of cheap guitars. The issue is that he's admitting to buying a counterfeit Gibson guitar.

I don't see the big deal. The guitar was used and hanging on a guitar shop wall. It is not as if he sought out a Chinese fake Gibson from one of those online retailers (like certain people on this forum do). The guitar was already in the musical ecosystem. The store selling it didn't try to pass it off as real and the kid knew what he was buying. The only other option would be to destroy counterfeits the second we realize what they are. Gibson would love that but it doesn't make sense for me.

 

[GilmourD]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I'm not gonna touch the fake aspect of the guitar (to me your guitar is the same as a joyo pedal, a chinese copy of a product that's barely legal since it's not licensed but hard to block from the market), it just turns out that most will condemn you for the guitar. It's cool that you're having fun (tinkering with cheap guitars is fun) but in the short-term, I'm thinking it won't be satisfying and you'll end-up trading/selling it again. Do what you will but a nice quality guitar wouldn't be that expensive on the used market and you'd end-up with a keeper... Just my 0.02$.

Except that Joyo is labeled Joyo. You don't buy a Joyo US Dream but find that it's labeled as a Suhr Riot or something.

 

[GilmourD]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I don't see the big deal. The guitar was used and hanging on a guitar shop wall. It is not as if he sought out a Chinese fake Gibson from one of those online retailers (like certain people on this forum do). The guitar was already in the musical ecosystem. The store selling it didn't try to pass it off as real and the kid knew what he was buying. The only other option would be to destroy counterfeits the second we realize what they are. Gibson would love that but it doesn't make sense for me.

I'd deface the headstock if it were me so that way nobody could ever pass it off as real in the future. It's probably cheaply made enough that he could probably scratch the "Gibson" logo of with his fingernail.

 

[LedSabbath]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

Quality > Quantity man.

I currently own only three guitars that are put together, two electrics and a classical (2004 Gibson SG non-Faded Special, Axl SRO, and a Manuel Ramirez model AV). I only play the Gibson and MR regularly. The Axl looked like a great deal at $300, unfortunately the bridge (Trem King) was a very bad design in practice. I can't add the third spring, nor can I play it with anything other than 9s (10s cause too much tension on the 2 springs and too little with the third spring sorta in place).

I am hoping to get a Les Paul within the next year or two, but am holding off since I am still in college. I am only looking at new models for specs. The used market is your best bet if you want a Gibson.

 

[Surgeon]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

Except that Joyo is labeled Joyo. You don't buy a Joyo US Dream but find that it's labeled as a Suhr Riot or something.

I agree with you, however, I still believe that the line is quite fine between the two situations:
1- cie copies without permission/license work and design of another entity and tries to pass product as original, counterfieting
2- company copies without permission/license the design/work of another cie/legal entity, rebrands the appearance and tries to pass i as an original product.

While scenario #2 isn't decietful (and apparently that's where the line is drawn for most folks), it's still one cie trying to profit from the work of another on the minimum required effort. While joyo clearly isn't the only one doing this, I still find the practice (again, not just joyo) just as dishonest, or a least ethically wrong.

Kid buys used counterfiet guitar knowingly from dealer who doesn't try to dupe anyone: I'm not gonna go shakin my fist screaming about ethics here.

 

[GilmourD]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I agree with you, however, I still believe that the line is quite fine between the two situations:
1- cie copies without permission/license work and design of another entity and tries to pass product as original, counterfieting
2- companie copies without permission/license the design/work of another cie/legal entity, rebrands the appearance and tries to pass i as an original product.

While scenario #2 isn't decietful (and apparently that's where the line is drawn for most folks), it's still one cie trying to profit from the work of another on the minimum required effort. While joyo clearly isn't the only one doing this, I still find the practice (again, not just joyo) just as dishonest, or a least ethically wrong.

Kid buys used counterfiet guitar knowingly from dealer who doesn't try to dupe anyone: I'm not gonna go shakin my fist screaming about ethics here.

Well, the thing here is that Joyo is copying circuits, which are not copywritable nor trademarkable under current law, and as long as Joyo is just using the circuits with commonly available components it's really a matter of the fact that electronics expertise and physics are not exclusive to anybody.

HOWEVER, if they copied the board layouts that would be a different story. The "artwork" of the actual circuitboard traces is actually registerable and copying that is against the law.

Essentially, it's the same thing that Fender did with the RCA tube manuals. Their early amps were straight lifts of the circuits from there. They were subsequently tweaked. Then the Marshall JTM45 was a direct lift of the Bassman 5F6A circuit, down to the fact that they even used 5881 tubes. Of course there were subsequent tweaks, but the topology is still the same.

This guitar, however, was manufactured to represent itself as a genuine Gibson. Fender never labeled the amps as RCA and Marshall never labeled the amps as Fender, though. Joyo doesn't try to represent itself as Ibanez, MXR, Suhr, Boss, or whoever's circuits their trying. That's where my disagreement is.

If whoever made that guitar copied every darn detail of a Gibson Les Paul but put their own name on it and sold it in an area where Gibson's trademark of their headstock and body shape don't apply, I'd be OK with it. Just look at ESP's Grassroots, Edwards, and Navigator lines, or Burny, or Tokai. They put their own names on the stuff, even if it they copy all the details of a Gibson Les Paul.

 

[Little Pigbacon]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I don't see the big deal. The guitar was used and hanging on a guitar shop wall. It is not as if he sought out a Chinese fake Gibson from one of those online retailers (like certain people on this forum do). The guitar was already in the musical ecosystem. The store selling it didn't try to pass it off as real and the kid knew what he was buying. The only other option would be to destroy counterfeits the second we realize what they are. Gibson would love that but it doesn't make sense for me.

One possible middle ground is not to buy it.

 

[Johnny the Kid]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

One possible middle ground is not to buy it.

This. I don't care about copies, but counterfeits are not cool. With the money that GF paid for that guitar, he could have gotten two Epi's that were probably on the same level, as far as features go.

 

[Surgeon]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

Well, the thing here is that Joyo is copying circuits, which are not copywritable nor trademarkable under current law, and as long as Joyo is just using the circuits with commonly available components it's really a matter of the fact that electronics expertise and physics are not exclusive to anybody.

HOWEVER, if they copied the board layouts that would be a different story. The "artwork" of the actual circuitboard traces is actually registerable and copying that is against the law.

Essentially, it's the same thing that Fender did with the RCA tube manuals. Their early amps were straight lifts of the circuits from there. They were subsequently tweaked. Then the Marshall JTM45 was a direct lift of the Bassman 5F6A circuit, down to the fact that they even used 5881 tubes. Of course there were subsequent tweaks, but the topology is still the same.

This guitar, however, was manufactured to represent itself as a genuine Gibson. Fender never labeled the amps as RCA and Marshall never labeled the amps as Fender, though. Joyo doesn't try to represent itself as Ibanez, MXR, Suhr, Boss, or whoever's circuits their trying. That's where my disagreement is.

If whoever made that guitar copied every darn detail of a Gibson Les Paul but put their own name on it and sold it in an area where Gibson's trademark of their headstock and body shape don't apply, I'd be OK with it. Just look at ESP's Grassroots, Edwards, and Navigator lines, or Burny, or Tokai. They put their own names on the stuff, even if it they copy all the details of a Gibson Les Paul.

Again: I know, understand and agree with everything you stated. Doesn' mean I have to believe it to be morally/ethically right. Jus because the law states that you can't trademark a circuit doesn't mean it's ethically right to copy it. It just means you're not transgressing the law by copying it but, imho, you're still profiting from somebody else's work.

That's again just my opinion and the way I would conduct myself if I had a pedal company, doesn't mean anybody else has to agree with me.

I do have to apologize: I didn't mean to derail this thread and make it into a lengthy discussion about right or wrong and grey zines of using other people's designs....

 

[GilmourD]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

Again: I know, understand and agree with everything you stated. Doesn' mean I have to believe it to be morally/ethically right. Jus because the law states that you can't trademark a circuit doesn't mean it's ethically right to copy it. It just means you're not transgressing the law by copying it but, imho, you're still profiting from somebody else's work.

That's again just my opinion and the way I would conduct myself if I had a pedal company, doesn't mean anybody else has to agree with me.

I do have to apologize: I didn't mean to derail this thread and make it into a lengthy discussion about right or wrong and grey zines of using other people's designs....

I do see your viewpoint. I just happen to not agree.

Not to poke the bear repeatedly... Haven't you built kit amps that were based on somebody else's circuits? Those kits weren't based on somebody else's circuits and they profited off the kits.

Incidentally, I don't think you actually derailed it much since the thread title basically calls out the whole issue.

 

[Securb]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I don't think vilifying a teenager in Australia is going to put an end to global counterfeiting. Hey Nathan enjoy your new axe.

 

[Surgeon]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I do see your viewpoint. I just happen to not agree.

Not to poke the bear repeatedly... Haven't you built kit amps that were based on somebody else's circuits? Those kits weren't based on somebody else's circuits and they profited off the kits.

Incidentally, I don't think you actually derailed it much since the thread title basically calls out the whole issue.

I don't have a problem with not seeing eye to eye with anyone on that topic, as I'm sure you don't either, this is a discussion no an argument.

Good point about the kits, I'll admit to a double-standard here, seeing as they don't sell a product, either finished counterfeit or rebranded copy but the material to, if you want and have the ability, copy it yourself.. But I agree, still a grey zone. The person that ends-up making the copy doesn't (theoretically) profit from said copy.

Another way I could twist the issue would be to ask (since you brought up the circuit protection aspect): are counterfeits not cool due to the unlawful aspect of them (since they infringe trademarks, contrary to circuits which can't be protected) or due to the deceitful aspect of the "perfect copy"? Or are g.

 

[JimmyO]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

Dude, supporting counterfeiting is not cool. Would love to say congrats on the new guitar, but I can't, as it's counterfeit. Not a copy or replica but counterfeit - claiming to be something that it isn't. It's totally fine if you are looking for an affordable Les Paul but can't stretch to a real Gibson - Epiphone makes great ones, and PRS, LTD etc make awesome single cut two humbucker guitars. No one deserves to have their work directly ripped off.

 

[Surgeon]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I don't think vilifying a teenager in Australia is going to put an end to global counterfeiting. Hey Nathan enjoy your new axe.

Careful Securb, I took that stance last time and ended-up ridiculed by a few... Don't want to be the good guy you know

 

[Securb]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

Careful Securb, I took that stance last time and ended-up ridiculed by a few... Don't want to be the good guy you know

I get ridiculed on a daily basis why should today be any different?

 

[Little Pigbacon]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I think we can condemn a practice without vilifying a person.

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I think we can condemn a practice without vilifying a person.

Maybe, even, those who demand new Gloss.

 

[Surgeon]

Re: NGD: Gibson LP.. Nah, just kidding! A Chibson.

I get ridiculed on a daily basis why should today be any different?

Awww, now we've found each other... <3