Chinese "Gibsons" Fabulous fakes eBay guide...

[stealthelephant]

at the end of the day there only people that can decide if its ok or not is gibson

 

[rockstar232007]

at the end of the day there only people that can decide if its ok or not is gibson

Well. We ALL know what THEIR position is on that.

Gibson.com: Gibson Slash Appetite Les Paul

 

[stealthelephant]

at the end of the day there only people that can decide if its ok or not is gibson

i was so tired when i wrote this i dunno how anyone can make sense of that?

what i meant is;
gibson decide if it oks to replicate their guitars or not


my assumption is that they are flattered if every now and again someone makes a nice once off copy, they step in if it happens to much (against PRS, Ibanez, and chinese counterfeiters)

theres a good article in guitarist magazine of may 2013 about this... "So sue me" is the title they went with

 

[dspelman]

If it says "Gibson" on the headstock and it's NOT made by Gibson, then it's a misrepresentation and a fraud.

Simple enough?

I agree.

But that wasn't my point.

 

[dspelman]

Well. We ALL know what THEIR position is on that.

I'm not so sure. Certainly their public position is that it's not acceptable to copy their name and headstock.

On the other hand, they've tacitly looked the other way when very high-end "replicas" are produced in small quantities, especially when they've benefited from the reputation of the artists who've used them (Iommi, Zappa, Slash, etc.).

And they've also benefited from the Chinese replicas (as long as they're not TOO accurate) -- these introduce FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) into the Gibson Used Market (from which Gibson makes no revenue) and have pushed some buyers into the New Market (from which they DO make substantial revenue).

I think that, in the end, Gibson adjusts the defense of their Moral High Ground to the level of their Bottom Line.

 

[Latearrival]

"Fake" - Definition:

Having a false or misleading appearance; fraudulent.
n.1. One that is not authentic or genuine; a sham.

How hard can it be?

 

[kasu]

"Fake" - Definition:

Having a false or misleading appearance; fraudulent.
n.1. One that is not authentic or genuine; a sham.

How hard can it be?

Well...I totally agree, but I guess its gotta hurt somewhat to call your x thousand bucks G-logo "replica" a fake.....

 

[stealthelephant]

Well...I totally agree, but I guess its gotta hurt somewhat to call your x thousand bucks G-logo "replica" a fake.....

most people use fake to imply its also crap. i wouldnt mind having a fake that is higher quality than a real one


ps that guide is still on ebay

 

[Kaicho8888]

REPORTED on copyrights infringement.

So what if it's better than a real Gibson...if it says "Gibson" on the headstock and it wasn't made by Gibson USA; it is a copyright infringement.

Obviously, they("Chibson") can't sell their "better than G" guitars under their own name. The problem is that people want and buy this lower priced product! It will cost Gibson big bucks to defend their copyrights in China. Perhaps it also fuels the desire to eventually get buyers to purchase a real Gibson.

Besides, I don't see Slash, Page, Clapton, et al using this guitar that's better supposedly than Gibson.

 

[martin H]

Has anyone tracked down just where the some of the fakes are made? Because it would seem that some great lengths are taken for some of them and takes some pretty dedicated manufacturing to put out in any sort of volume. Maybe some sort of 'Skunkworks', unspoken division of some Chinese guitar plant that 'normally' makes Epiphones or ESPs or the like?

It wouln't suprise me that some of these are coming from the back door of a legitimate contract manufacturer. It's a constant problem with manufacturing in China that you end up putting all the design specs, drawings, CAM data etc in the trust of the local manufacturers.

If you don't own the plant, they often keep manuacturing the same parts after your production run is finished, or make a few thousand more than your run to sell on the grey market later.

If you do own the plant, all the data needed to manufacture the parts invariably leaks out to someone outside, who then sets up shop to make the same product from your data and specs. if you're doing all your shaping with computer controlled machinery, all you need is the correct input paramaters stolen from a legitimate manufacturer.

It's a hazard of doing business in a county that does not recognize most intellectual property laws.

 

[martin H]

I'm not so sure. Certainly their public position is that it's not acceptable to copy their name and headstock.

On the other hand, they've tacitly looked the other way when very high-end "replicas" are produced in small quantities, especially when they've benefited from the reputation of the artists who've used them (Iommi, Zappa, Slash, etc.).

.

I really don't see a problem with this. Gibson owns the trademark, and have a perfect right to not prosecute violators who make very high qualty small-run copies while attacking cheap copies that devalue the brand

 

[Johny_Two_Hats]

A fake is a fake...
Whether It's a good fake "replica" or a chibson...
Some of these replicas might be great guitars...
But if the headstock reads gibson and it wasn't made by gibson... it is a fake...
No questions asked....

 

[Johny_Two_Hats]

A fake is a fake...
Whether It's a good fake "replica" or a chibson...
Some of these replicas might be great guitars...
But if the headstock reads gibson and it wasn't made by gibson... it is a fake...
No questions asked....

 

[Johny_Two_Hats]

Sorry didn't mean to post twice... Curse you technology!

 

[Cpt Matt Sparrow]

I'm getting sick of you skeptics about fakes - I know what I am buying and love my Gibson Jaguar. It looks just like the one Burt Cobain played.

 

[MiniB]

It wouln't suprise me that some of these are coming from the back door of a legitimate contract manufacturer. It's a constant problem with manufacturing in China that you end up putting all the design specs, drawings, CAM data etc in the trust of the local manufacturers.

If you don't own the plant, they often keep manuacturing the same parts after your production run is finished, or make a few thousand more than your run to sell on the grey market later.

If you do own the plant, all the data needed to manufacture the parts invariably leaks out to someone outside, who then sets up shop to make the same product from your data and specs. if you're doing all your shaping with computer controlled machinery, all you need is the correct input paramaters stolen from a legitimate manufacturer.

It's a hazard of doing business in a county that does not recognize most intellectual property laws.

That's kinda' what I figured......especially since even though being cheaper knockoffs, they'd still need an organized infrastructure to put out the way they do. Technological/computer advancement no doubt aiding that in recent times.

https://vimeo.com/40226173

Look at 3:20 in particular. Heck...they make the iPhones/iPads for Apple over there already, right? Wonder what kind of counterfeit racket is going on with that, too.


I think the West as a whole should counter buy calling all Chinese food 'Western Takeout'.