Chinese "Gibsons" Fabulous fakes eBay guide...

[colchar]

I think the difference is if it's made specifically for a private request/order of a replica, as opposed to trying to sell them publicly and using Gibson's name/rep for it. The former of which (and in some cases, closer to an original than any recent real Gibson will ever get) I don't frown upon like the latter. Also, if for sale then clearly indicated that it is indeed a custom-made replica.

It matters not why it was made, who made it, for whom it was made, for what purpose it was made, or if it will ever be sold - if it says Gibson on the headstock but was not made by Gibson then it is a fake.

Kinda' like if someone were to build a spot-on replica of a Ferrari 250 California or such for me from the ground up....you can bet I'd want the prancing horse and the name Ferrari on it.

Still wouldn't make it a Ferrari and that would still be a violation of copyright.

 

[MiniB]

It matters not why it was made, who made it, for whom it was made, for what purpose it was made, or if it will ever be sold - if it says Gibson on the headstock but was not made by Gibson then it is a fake.

Some people like to call some of them 'replicas'. So all the connotations that come with 'fake' might not apply the same in all situations, that's the point. The one's on eBay, without a doubt as fake as they come.

Still wouldn't make it a Ferrari and that would still be a violation of copyright.

Not a 'genuine Ferrari', but not devoid of value regarding the association by default. Depends on the circumstances and how it is sold.....and again, wouldn't necessarily make it a 'fake' if the truth behind it is fully disclosed in certain circumstances.

'Fake' Porsche Spyder:
http://www.fantasyjunction.com/cars/1030-Porsche (Beck)-550 Spyder Replica-2332 c.c. Flat 4-Cylinder

Should a reputable dealer of high-end collectibles refused to even deal with a fake, or at least take every opportunity to label it as such and basically gave it away for free for not being the 'real thing'? Should Porsche have stepped in and ordered the car destroyed?

Heck, the rocker who many attribute the rebirth of Les Paul popularity to did so...with a fake/replica/etc....which makes it all the more humorous that so many 'real' Gibson products now bear his name/association, when they have a fake to thank for it.

Not condoning deception in any way, a 'fake is a fake' ain't always that simple. But again, the guitar in the OP is a flat-out fake in every sense.

 

[kasu]

I think the difference is if it's made specifically for a private request/order of a replica, as opposed to trying to sell them publicly and using Gibson's name/rep for it. The former of which (and in some cases, closer to an original than any recent real Gibson will ever get) I don't frown upon like the latter. Also, if for sale then clearly indicated that it is indeed a custom-made replica.

Kinda' like if someone were to build a spot-on replica of a Ferrari 250 California or such for me from the ground up....you can bet I'd want the prancing horse and the name Ferrari on it. Someone selling a makeover-kit one built on a Mazda MX-5 frame or what have you...as a Ferrari or as an unabashed poser-mobile...that's different.

Hmmm...yeahh...some "prancing horses"... at least its cheaper to get ripped off by a chinese...
photos of Fake 1959 Gibson Les Paul guitars Forgery Replicas

 

[rockstar232007]

Hmmm...yeahh...some "prancing horses"... at least its cheaper to get ripped off by a chinese...
photos of Fake 1959 Gibson Les Paul guitars Forgery Replicas

Apples to oranges.

At least when you buy a true, well made replica, you're buying something that 90% of the time, is as good or better than the real thing (replica vs. vintage).

Also, there's a HUGE difference between a cheap counterfeit and a replica, as far as quality is concerned, as well as their intended purposes in the market - counterfeits are made for the sole purpose of deception. Replicas are not. It all boils down to intent.

 

[TheZeppelinKid1991]

if you read a little more this is what he says

After leaving the guitar accidentally on my verandah in direct full sunlight for two days (not recommended) the flame top has become more intense!!

if you want your sunburst to literally absorb the power of the sun then offer it to the sun god and leave it on your porch LOL

 

[stealthelephant]

MiniB

i think the words you are misunderstanding are "violation of copyright" as opposed to fake / replica?

one can make an exact R9 replica, better than gibson - know its a replica, advertise it as a replica, but when they stamp Gibson on the headstock they are in violation of copyright / trademarks laws.

 

[rockstar232007]

MiniB

i think the words you are misunderstanding are "violation of copyright" as opposed to fake / replica?

one can make an exact R9 replica, better than gibson - know its a replica, advertise it as a replica, but when they stamp Gibson on the headstock they are in violation of copyright / trademarks laws.

Two words: Kris Derrig.

 

[stealthelephant]

I'm afraid I don't understand the message behind ur 2 words.

Again I'm not saying anything about counterfeiting / replicas. Copyright violation is about using someone else's copyrighted trade mark without permission

That guy u posted may have had permission.

 

[kasu]

Apples to oranges.

At least when you buy a true, well made replica, you're buying something that 90% of the time, is as good or better than the real thing (replica vs. vintage).

Also, there's a HUGE difference between a cheap counterfeit and a replica, as far as quality is concerned, as well as their intended purposes in the market - counterfeits are made for the sole purpose of deception. Replicas are not. It all boils down to intent.

Total BS in my book. Of course there is huge diffrerence, both in price and quality/accuracy, but its still just two sides of the same coin: Counterfeiting.
You have the same exact problem with "Replicas" but ten times worse. Someone will get ripped off bigtime if the seller isnt honest about what he is selling. Of course Replicas are made to decieve..or they wouldnt have the illegal G logo on there. The level of workmanship or historical accuracy is totally irrelevant. A fake is a fake, its bogus. Slashes Derrig guitar thingy is a fake Gibson, doesnt matter how good it is. And yes, I would love to have it, but its still counterfeit. The hypocracy regarding this issue is quite funny...

 

[MiniB]

MiniB

i think the words you are misunderstanding are "violation of copyright" as opposed to fake / replica?

one can make an exact R9 replica, better than gibson - know its a replica, advertise it as a replica, but when they stamp Gibson on the headstock they are in violation of copyright / trademarks laws.

Oh, I'm not the one confusing it...I think that those who claim to look at the the same way as they do Chinese copies sold on ebay are. Different circumstances...but some apparently don't feel so. And many times a replica being portrayed/shown has its logo either blurred out or conveniently just out of frame...but we all know what it does say. Heck, there are several threads of replicas being made that way here in the Luthiers forum. Should they be called out like these auctions are?

Total BS in my book. Of course there is huge diffrerence, both in price and quality/accuracy, but its still just two sides of the same coin: Counterfeiting.

I don't believe so...because from day one most of the time the replicas are ordered, made, and then fully disclosed to be replicas and not 'real' Gibsons. Whereas counterfeits are made and sold with the specific purpose of deception into thinking they are genuine. It's not like they're both adding to the same 'karma' or what have you. 'Counterfeiting' is a specific term, too. Technically, they're both 'recreations'.


Plus...let's say someone makes a replica Les Paul, right down to the Gibson Logo...shows it off as his replica out in the open, but never sells it. he plays it himself, and makes money as a musician while playing it. And even if he sells the guitar to a friend who knows that it's a replica...I don't think there's anything illegal going on there, nor anything wrong for that matter. Now, if that friend turned around and put it up on eBay as a Gibson Les Paul historic '59...well then....

 

[colchar]

Some people like to call some of them 'replicas'. So all the connotations that come with 'fake' might not apply the same in all situations, that's the point. The one's on eBay, without a doubt as fake as they come.

If they say 'Gibson' on the headstock but were not made by Gibson it matters not whether you call them fakes or replicas.

Not a 'genuine Ferrari', but not devoid of value regarding the association by default. Depends on the circumstances and how it is sold.....and again, wouldn't necessarily make it a 'fake' if the truth behind it is fully disclosed in certain circumstances.

If it says Gibson or Ferrari but was not made by the company in question then it is a fake. No amount of rationalization is going to change that.

Should a reputable dealer of high-end collectibles refused to even deal with a fake, or at least take every opportunity to label it as such and basically gave it away for free for not being the 'real thing'?

A reputable dealer should have nothing to do with fakes. And if they do, it might violate their agreement with the original company.

Should Porsche have stepped in and ordered the car destroyed?

That is entirely up to Porsche and how they choose to protect their copyrights.

, a 'fake is a fake' ain't always that simple.

Yes, it actually is that simple.

 

[colchar]

Apples to oranges.

At least when you buy a true, well made replica, you're buying something that 90% of the time, is as good or better than the real thing (replica vs. vintage).

Also, there's a HUGE difference between a cheap counterfeit and a replica, as far as quality is concerned, as well as their intended purposes in the market - counterfeits are made for the sole purpose of deception. Replicas are not. It all boils down to intent.

No, it does not boil down to intent - it boils down to copyright infringement regardless of quality or intent.

If Rembrandt had painted a copy of a Michelangelo that still wouldn't make it a Michelangelo.

Two words: Kris Derrig.

As soon as he put 'Gibson' on the headstock it was a fake. The fact that Gibson now makes reissues of that guitar merely demonstrates their hypocrisy.

 

[MiniB]

If they say 'Gibson' on the headstock but were not made by Gibson it matters not whether you call them fakes or replicas.

It does when it comes to how or whether it's sold.

If it says Gibson or Ferrari but was not made by the company in question then it is a fake. No amount of rationalization is going to change that.

No one is trying to 'rationalize' any of them somehow being genuine. The question is whether they all fall under the same umbrella of worthlessness by the loose commonality of not being genuine. Also, is just the undertaking of actually making any of then...replica or 'Chibson', equally immoral or illegal?

There are different circumstances, especially when it comes to sale.

A reputable dealer should have nothing to do with fakes. And if they do, it might violate their agreement with the original company.

But we're talking about dealers of collectibles not retail, and in some instances, a fully acknowledged replica can be deemed of some collector value due to the craftsmanship behind it. Happens a lot in cars, albeit mostly with models no longer in production...still, none of them are advertised as being the genuine make. Should they be viewed the same as a a 'Chibson' on ebay?

That is entirely up to Porsche and how they choose to protect their copyrights.

Also depends on how the car is created or sold.

Yes, it actually is that simple.

Simplistic actually, if one chooses to look thusly.

No, it does not boil down to intent - it boils down to copyright infringement regardless of quality or intent.

Are we talking copyright or trademark?

 

[skysc]

i wouldnt mind having a les paul copy ( tokai , esp , agile etc ... ) but not one that would say GIBSON on it . whats the point of having on a headstock that isnt a product of that company . to have the "prestige" of having gibson wirte on it .. sorry but theres no prestige at owning a Gibson .. you can get a 550 $ "gibson" if your interested in the name.


so no i wouldnt buy any copy and if its like NHL , NFL copy jerseys that lose their color after one wash ( red turn pink on my NHL jerseys ) , ipod touch , iphone copy etc ... from china ... then its most probably a piece of junk . Ive seen so much junk from chinese sellers ( wireless mouse and keyboard that didnt work at all and were ubber junk ) , i almost never buy on ebay electronic from chinese seller cause its most of the time garbage . the iphone copy look the same .. but youll swear its a commodore 64 chipset inside .. swiping through icons take forever and all the heapdhones jack and plug were crap . Same with USB flash drive .. you can get a 64 gig Usb drive from china for 9.99 $ ... but transfering files take forever on it ( even thought it says usb 3.0 or 2.0 ) . So your gibson might look good .. im sure it will fall apart in 1 year . Theres so much junk built in china its horrible . the girl at work ordered 2 wireless mouse yesterday for 9 $ on ebay ... both didnt work ( one has the battery dead .. the other the left click button got stuck and broke after 2 click ) .. she notice the seller ... they told her to keep them ... no need to return them ??? NO ... well send you 2 new .

you want a cheap les paul copy grab a agile or something from korea .. at least the guitar is legally built .


In life , you generally get what you pay for ... if you think that the 150 $ gibson fake play and the fretjob is as good and the craftmanship is quality .. your wrong .

i wouldnt buy fake GIBSON ... but would play other brand like esp , tokai , agile etc..


i hate counterfeit ... if your product is good then why not start your own brand with it . why make fake NIKE jerseys ? fake Oakley sunglasses ? start your brand with your product name .

so much junk from china i wouldnt even touch a fake gibson guitar . im not saying that chinese dont built nice stuff .. iphone , real nike , adidas and sunglasses (oakley ) etc .. 3/4 of the goods nowadays is built in china ... but fake goods from counterfeit is ALWAYS garbage . everything faks ive seen from designer jeans to ipad .. were piece of junk . im no snobbist who think made in america is better ... im not american .. theres great guitars build everywhere in the world .. u.s.a , canada, china , japan , korea , u.k , sweden etc .etc. etc... but im 90 % sure that a fake "gibson" will be ubber junk cause if their product has a sustainable quality and possible market ... they wouldnt hide under a fake name .

 

[closed_PaulSlack]

Apart from the obvious logo, Gibson hold copyrights to many many aspects of their guitars. Just copying the shape of the headstock alone is a breach of copyright. So fake, clone, replica, call it what you will, if it isn't made by Gibson (or authorised manufacturer), it's a FAKE. no matter who made it, where or why! Simple as that!

 

[MiniB]

If basically meaning not a Gibson-made Gibson, then yep. Are some still more desirable than others...or even more than Gibson-made Gibsons....well....

 

[closed_PaulSlack]

i hate counterfeit ... if your product is good then why not start your own brand with it . why make fake NIKE jerseys ? fake Oakley sunglasses ? start your brand with your product name .

I agree with the majority of what you put except this. Fakers don't have the time, funds or resources to flood the potential market with the kind of publicity that makes all the brands you name a desirable product, that's why they piggyback on other companies hard work and simply make copies.

There are also a LOT of people who know they are wearing fake Ray-Ban sunglasses, Rolex watches, Armani jeans, for example, but don't care.

 

[closed_PaulSlack]

If basically meaning not a Gibson-made Gibson, then yep. Are some still more desirable than others...or even more than Gibson-made Gibsons....well....

They key word is "desirable". So No!

 

[Hack]

 

[rockstar232007]

Total BS in my book. Of course there is huge diffrerence, both in price and quality/accuracy, but its still just two sides of the same coin: Counterfeiting.
You have the same exact problem with "Replicas" but ten times worse. Someone will get ripped off bigtime if the seller isnt honest about what he is selling. Of course Replicas are made to decieve..or they wouldnt have the illegal G logo on there. The level of workmanship or historical accuracy is totally irrelevant. A fake is a fake, its bogus. Slashes Derrig guitar thingy is a fake Gibson, doesnt matter how good it is. And yes, I would love to have it, but its still counterfeit. The hypocracy regarding this issue is quite funny...

Don't get me wrong, as I'm not defending "replicas". I'm simply stating that the difference between counterfeits and replicas, as far as their intent is, counterfeits are made simply to rip people off. Replicas are made for people who want a truly custom "'50s Les Paul", for less than the cost of a vintage one.

And, regardless of what name is on the headstock, most people who order replicas want the open-book style, which Gibson ALSO owns the patent on. So, it's kind of a double-edged sword.