Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

In honor of my apology to Driverblues and his wife.

yeah I know "cleaver" shapduuup! :lmao: -Fixed.

 

[Jacew]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

I hear ya. The Constitution, one of our most cut and dry legal documents as a nation, experiences very little change, but it has changed immensly from having been subject to centuries of interpretation.

The letter of the law, established by a Congress of 535 people, means very little if some hotshot lawyer can successfully argue his position of that laws meaning.

I'm glad I decided to switch from pursing a career in law to one in engineering.

Most of those people have been lawyers:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-08/congress-might-need-more-lawyers

 

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Happy Canada Day!

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

You seem insistent on the fact that non-reverse Firebirds are Jazzmaster copies. I know it's no use, but I'll ask: how do you figure?

The scale length is different, the wood is different, the pickup design is different, the Firebird is neck-through whereas the JM is bolt-on, the wiring is different, they sound nothing alike, they are marketed towards different customers, one was introduced as it's own model where the other is a gimmick based off of the fact that JMs were referred to as "the reverse Gibson", one has a tummy and forearm contour and the other doesn't, and I could go on and on.

The only thing, in my opinion, they have in common is the 6-inline headstock, the face mounted jack, and they kind of sort of look the same if you are drunk and squinting.

 

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

You seem insistent on the fact that non-reverse Firebirds are Jazzmaster copies. I know it's no use, but I'll ask: how do you figure?

The scale length is different, the wood is different, the pickup design is different, the Firebird is neck-through whereas the JM is bolt-on, the wiring is different, they sound nothing alike, they are marketed towards different customers, one was introduced as it's own model where the other is a gimmick based off of the fact that JMs were referred to as "the reverse Gibson", one has a tummy and forearm contour and the other doesn't, and I could go on and on.

The only thing, in my opinion, they have in common is the 6-inline headstock, the face mounted jack, and they kind of sort of look the same if you are drunk and squinting.

It's the styling, they were made specifically to get Gibson in the door with the Space Age/Surf/Car culture style Fender had successfully marketing since mid/late 50s. read any Guitar history book, and they'll explain the genesis of many of Gibson's 60s decisions. Gibson had put it's money into acquiring Epiphone in 1957 or so -cant remember, a manufacturer making the same style and type of products -so they were just buying up market share of their existing market -not breaking into newer areas -and not recognizing the trends and demands of the younger players, and suddenly Fender was on the map.

In typical Gibson fashion, they were late to recognize and just came out with a Gibson version of the popular Fender guitars.

Plus, Christopher,.... jokes man jokes..

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

You seem insistent on the fact that non-reverse Firebirds are Jazzmaster copies. I know it's no use, but I'll ask: how do you figure?

The scale length is different, the wood is different, the pickup design is different, the Firebird is neck-through whereas the JM is bolt-on, the wiring is different, they sound nothing alike, they are marketed towards different customers, one was introduced as it's own model where the other is a gimmick based off of the fact that JMs were referred to as "the reverse Gibson", one has a tummy and forearm contour and the other doesn't, and I could go on and on.

The only thing, in my opinion, they have in common is the 6-inline headstock, the face mounted jack, and they kind of sort of look the same if you are drunk and squinting.

Sounds like you might be forgetting this whole fiasco is only about the shape of the instruments; not the scale length, not the wiring, not the construction, not the sound, not the target audience. Just the shape.

IMHO the reverse Firebird does have a number of visual/shape similarities to the Jazzmaster. The offset body, the pickguard coverage, the soap bar looking pickups, the knob placement following the body curves, the funky curled headstock, the switch location.

 

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Sounds like you might be forgetting this whole fiasco is only about the shape of the instruments; not the scale length, not the wiring, not the construction, not the sound, not the target audience. Just the shape.

IMHO the reverse Firebird does have a number of visual/shape similarities to the Jazzmaster. The offset body, the pickguard coverage, the soap bar looking pickups, the knob placement following the body curves, the funky curled headstock, the switch location.

Not to mention that this is an established fact -we don't even need to argue with anyone -Firebirds were made to look like Fenders Jazzmasters for a reason. Gibson was getting their a** handed to them by the upstart Fender

 

[Chris Pile]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Sounds like you might be forgetting this whole fiasco is only about the shape of the instruments;

No, it's not. I read EVERYTHING Gibson put on its website about this, and they are even trying to protect brand names like Aeolian, and the names of artists like Bill Monroe. There are over 100 items on the list - it's not just body shapes.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

So what you're trying to tell me is that when Leo Fender confronted Gibson in 1965 about the Firebird body shape being too similar to his 1959 patent on the Jazzmaster, they redesigned it so that instead of loosely looking like a Jazzmaster, they made it into a straight up copy?

Something about your history isn't adding up. I know you want to be the driver of the latest Gibson hate bandwagon, but you're off the mark with the Firebird/Jazzmaster comparison.

 

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

So what you're trying to tell me is that when Leo Fender confronted Gibson in 1965 about the Firebird body shape being too similar to his 1959 patent on the Jazzmaster, they redesigned it so that instead of loosely looking like a Jazzmaster, they made it into a straight up copy?

Something about your history isn't adding up. I know you want to be the driver of the latest Gibson hate bandwagon, but you're off the mark with the Firebird/Jazzmaster comparison.

Whoah, I'm guessing you mistyped something? Leo fender confronting who? What are you talking about?

I'm saying it's fact that the Firebird was a direct reaction to Fender's upstart success and the styles Gibson was behind on.... I have no idea what you are meaning other than this.

hell, even Wikipedia knows about it.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Whoah, I'm guessing you mistyped something? Leo fender confronting who? What are you talking about?

I'm saying it's fact that the Firebird was a direct reaction to Fender's upstart success and the styles Gibson was behind on.... I have no idea what you are meaning other than this.

hell, even Wikipedia knows about it.

"In 1963, Gibson released the Firebird, a funky guitar that looked like a hallucinated version of Ted McCarty’s Explorer design. It was dreamt up by Ray Dietrich, who made his career designing cars for Lincoln and Packard.

The Firebird was unique in a few ways, most notably for its neck that ran all the way through the body. Then, there was offset waist. The story goes that Fender threatened to sue Gibson over the Firebird’s offset wait, forcing Gibson to halt production and redesign the guitar.

It’s hard to tell if Fender had a patent on offset waists, but the second version of the Firebird did not feature one.

That was taken from Reverb.

 

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

"In 1963, Gibson released the Firebird, a funky guitar that looked like a hallucinated version of Ted McCarty’s Explorer design. It was dreamt up by Ray Dietrich, who made his career designing cars for Lincoln and Packard.

The Firebird was unique in a few ways, most notably for its neck that ran all the way through the body. Then, there was offset waist. The story goes that Fender threatened to sue Gibson over the Firebird’s offset wait, forcing Gibson to halt production and redesign the guitar.

It’s hard to tell if Fender had a patent on offset waists, but the second version of the Firebird did not feature one.

That was taken from Reverb.

yeah, so what's your point? the adjusted their direct ripoff slightly to try and avoid a lawsuit -which still has the same headstock and shape. -further demonstrating hypocrisy and my point.

So I'm not sure what or why you keep engaging on a thread clearly meant to jab Gibson about their own hypocrisy.

If this bothers you, I'm not sure why.

Just giggle or not.

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

"In 1963, Gibson released the Firebird, a funky guitar that looked like a hallucinated version of Ted McCarty’s Explorer design. It was dreamt up by Ray Dietrich, who made his career designing cars for Lincoln and Packard.

The Firebird was unique in a few ways, most notably for its neck that ran all the way through the body. Then, there was offset waist. The story goes that Fender threatened to sue Gibson over the Firebird’s offset wait, forcing Gibson to halt production and redesign the guitar.

It’s hard to tell if Fender had a patent on offset waists, but the second version of the Firebird did not feature one.

That was taken from Reverb.

Fender’s chief complaint was the headstock mirrored theirs, along with the offset, so Gibson flipped it so it was the same orientation. It’s not hate. It’s perfectly valid to remind Gibson of it’s own infringement of trademark, given their recent abusive legal posture.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

So I'm not sure what or why you keep engaging on a thread clearly meant to jab Gibson about their own hypocrisy.

If this bothers you, I'm not sure why.

Just giggle or not.

Everytime I try to add something to this conversation, you just dismiss it and fire back with irrelevant nonsense that barerly touches onto to the point that I was trying to make, all the while trying to make me feel like I'm in the minority for disagreeing with you. If you want an example, look right above. A quick Google search is all it took to show you that you had your Gibson/Firebird conspiracy backwards, and instead of accepting it and move on, you respond with an irrelevant strawman arguement about the headstock (which by the way, I agreed with you upon several comments ago).

I'd be better off discussing guitar history with a brick wall; at least I wouldn't feel like it thought it had anything to prove.

 

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Everytime I try to add something to this conversation, you just dismiss it and fire back with irrelevant nonsense that barerly touches onto to the point that I was trying to make, all the while trying to make me feel like I'm in the minority for disagreeing with you. If you want an example, look right above. A quick Google search is all it took to show you that you had your Gibson/Firebird conspiracy backwards, and instead of accepting it and move on, you respond with an irrelevant strawman arguement about the headstock (which by the way, I agreed with you upon several comments ago).

I'd be better off discussing guitar history with a brick wall; at least I wouldn't feel like it thought it had anything to prove.

View attachment 99555

I realize it's ironic that I use a direct Fender Infringement is in my celebration post. :lmao: we can do that thread too.

 

[Driver Blues]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Touche'. -making jokes and got excited by Driverblues having a bass playing wife and sensitive about my thumbs spelling stuff on my phone.

I formally rescind my aggression towards her questioning my imagination and revert back to the goal of making her giggle.

Everytime I try to add something to this conversation, you just dismiss it and fire back with irrelevant nonsense that barerly touches onto to the point that I was trying to make, all the while trying to make me feel like I'm in the minority for disagreeing with you. If you want an example, look right above. A quick Google search is all it took to show you that you had your Gibson/Firebird conspiracy backwards, and instead of accepting it and move on, you respond with an irrelevant strawman arguement about the headstock (which by the way, I agreed with you upon several comments ago).

I'd be better off discussing guitar history with a brick wall; at least I wouldn't feel like it thought it had anything to prove.

View attachment 99555

Yeah, I agree with you to an extent. But just remember that this is the internet, a playground for people to have their superiority complexes and can insult the education of anybody’s wife without fear of any repercussions.

 

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Yeah, I agree with you to an extent. But just remember that this is the internet, a playground for people to have their superiority complexes and can insult the education of anybody’s wife without fear of any repercussions.

You gave a quote from a lawyer -which couldn't possibly be from a lawyer -and I said you either misquoted her or her education was imaginary -which was a pun on your direct quote about the lawsuit being a good imagination -it wasnt even meant to be an insult just a witty retort on your words. And I apologized. Are you accepting my apology? or not? and if not, plz correct your legal quote that's not from your wife -the lawyer.

And this the other guy keeps misquoting and changing the only point we are discussing on here and then accusing me of his own offense. -it's crazy talk.

Superiority complex? I am as far from that as anyone on here -I'm reasonable, I respect others and apologize when I over step my bounds -every time.

Who wouldn't back that statement I just made? ask an admin or someone on here often.

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Can we get back to Gibson bashing? It’s something we can almost all agree on. ;-)

 

[NegativeEase]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Can we get back to Gibson bashing? It’s something we can almost all agree on. ;-)

Yes please!!!!!! :lmao::

 

[Chris Pile]

Re: Official "Submit your counterfeit claim to Gibson" thread!!!!!

Can we get back to Gibson bashing? It’s something we can almost all agree on. ;-)

Seriously? They've got problems, but this piling on of hate for the sake of hate should settle down. Bag on 'em for the stuff they do, not the stuff you think they've done, or you imagine they've done, or what some yahoo said they did. Show some sense.

I guess what I'm getting at is this.... Some of you sound like you want Gibson destroyed, razed to the ground, and all management killed. If you think this, get a grip!

The loss of Gibson would NOT be a good thing. I want them to straighten their **** out, make good stuff all the time, and a decent profit. There IS enough to go around for every other maker, as well as Gibson. Heck, if they left - who would all the Chinese counterfeiters copy?