# Chitars Canada?



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

So a thread in the for sale section discussing sale of a Chinese knock-off Gibson Les Paul went poof earlier today (fair enough it was way off topic). Thought I would start this thread to open the discussion on fake / homage / replica guitars in general, and them being for sale here in the classified section. We seem to have two attitudes, depending on the sticker price of the guitar in question. Is there any difference between an Ali Express "Chibson" and any other guitar with the Gibson logo that was not made by them? Same goes for Fenders and partscasters I suppose.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Havent we done this before?


----------



## terminalvertigo (Jun 12, 2010)

BlueRocker said:


> So a thread in the for sale section discussing sale of a Chinese knock-off Gibson Les Paul went poof earlier today (fair enough it was way off topic). Thought I would start this thread to open the discussion on fake / homage / replica guitars in general, and them being for sale here in the classified section. We seem to have two attitudes, depending on the sticker price of the guitar in question. Is there any difference between an Ali Express "Chibson" and any other guitar with the Gibson logo that was not made by them? Same goes for Fenders and partscasters I suppose.



Well, you started the thread.. what's your opinion?


----------



## MetalTele79 (Jul 20, 2020)

As long as the origin is disclosed I don't have a problem with them in the classifieds. It's up to the the buyer to decide if the asking price is worth it.


----------



## terminalvertigo (Jun 12, 2010)

Here are the rules:

*Rules specific to the For Sale Forum*

1) No eBay, Kijiji or Craig List ads to be posted in the forums.
2) Guitar and related equipment only
3) Please post only items YOU own
4) No more than 3 for sale threads allowed per user/per forum. Multiple items per thread allowed and preferred in pedals and Guitar Parts.
5) Replica/fake/counterfeit guitars MUST be clearly advertised as such. No images of headstock logos should be present in an ad that is for one of these guitars. If you are not sure of the provenance of your instrument, please do not list it for sale here.
6) Please update your ad if item sells and change the prefix to SOLD
6) GuitarsCanada accepts no responsibility for deals made through the forum
7) Please do not comment on asking prices
8) No derogatory remarks regarding items for sale
9) Items posted must have an asking price in CDN funds (Trade items exluded)
10) Please use the appropriate thread prefix in your thread title. ie) FS, FT, WTB.
11) Please limit the bumping of ads to once weekly.
12) Members MUST have at least _25_ posts and be registered for _5_ days before they can either create a new thread or reply to existing ones in any of the For Sale sections.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

As much as I dislike them, as long as it's disclosed where they are from no big deal.

I'd prefer that they don't get into the country in the first place.


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

terminalvertigo said:


> Well, you started the thread.. what's your opinion?


I didn't know I had to have an opinion to start a poll (I did read the rules).

I look at them the same as a Porche 911 Kit car made from a Pontiac Fiero (dating myself here). They just seem a little sad.


----------



## silvertonebetty (Jan 4, 2015)

I don’t think you are legally allowed to sell counterfeit products. None the less as long as they are labeled as a fake why not


----------



## RBlakeney (Mar 12, 2017)

I think people should sell them and try to pass them off, and then we can see who gets to be the first to be murdered. Someone here must have an “in” with reality tv shows.


----------



## StevieMac (Mar 4, 2006)

RBlakeney said:


> I think people should sell them and try to pass them off, and then we can see who gets to be the first to be murdered. Someone here must have an “in” with reality tv shows.


Things turned dark _right_ quick...


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

Combating Counterfeit Products Act


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

#4....although I dont see any need or point to obscure the headstock.
disclosure is the main thing.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

BlueRocker said:


> Combating Counterfeit Products Act
> 
> View attachment 377469
> 
> View attachment 377470


Is the copyright international, or country by country? I'm not sure if it's that or patents that have to be claimed by countries.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I have a problem with any guitar maker that applies another brand or logo to their products.

It doesn't matter to me if it costs $200 or $10K.

If your guitar is so good that you can charge that much for it, why wouldn't you want your OWN name on the headstock anyway?

I'm not saying there aren't some excellent instruments out there that have Gibson or Fender on the headstock, but that have never been inside a Gibson or Fender shop.

I personally won't knowingly ever buy such an instrument.

Different strokes.

Clearly the cheapo knock offs represent a higher risk of downstream fraud.


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

sulphur said:


> Is the copyright international, or country by country? I'm not sure if it's that or patents that have to be claimed by countries.


Gibson Brands Inc Registered Patents And Trademarks


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

Diablo said:


> #4....although I dont see any need or point to obscure the headstock.
> disclosure is the main thing.


Arguably, by disclosing the item is not authentic, or by obscuring the headstock logo, you are proving that you are KNOWINGLY selling an item that_ "an infringing copy of a work or other subject-matter in which copyright subsists"_


----------



## crann (May 10, 2014)

As an amoral slug, squirming about, I'm pretty open to any and all sales and apply the principle "buyer beware". Obviously my sensibilities aren't, well, sensible, but the marketplace itself bears no responsibility or liability. If someone presents a fake honestly (oxymoron of the day) I think it should stand on the reputation of the seller. I also don't care if they're banned outright, because I would never purchase such a thing. Either let them all be sold (high end or not) OR stand on principle and ban the sales of anything claiming providence it has no right to.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

TGP has a rule / sticky about even discussing fakes on their site.

"Please don't post about "replicas" and counterfeit guitars"


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

I guess every partscaster made with non authentic fender parts shouldnt be allowed then?? Or at least pics??


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Grainslayer said:


> I guess every partscaster made with non authentic fender parts shouldnt be allowed then?? Or at least pics??


Let's just say, if I sell you a partcaster it won't have a Fender logo on the headstock.


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

Grainslayer said:


> I guess every partscaster made with non authentic fender parts shouldnt be allowed then?? Or at least pics??


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

BlueRocker said:


>


Good movie


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Milkman said:


> Let's just say, if I sell you a partcaster it won't have a Fender logo on the headstock.


Some do though.



Grainslayer said:


> I guess every partscaster made with non authentic fender parts shouldnt be allowed then?? Or at least pics??


There are some high end LP copies too that cost more than a CS RI that nobody bats an eyelash at either.
I think that the topic had been raised on that scenario already somewhere here.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

I think it's double standard.

You can sell a Partscater on here, yes with most Fender parts, but it has a Fender logo on a Mighty Mite neck or some other neck brand. And that seems to be normal and accepted. There are all sorts of YouTube videos on this, but you're not going to see the same thing about doing that with a Gibson logo.

They're all fraud, every one of them - despite some being nice guitars to play & own.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

its what I never liked about Fenders.
You can put a Fender neck, with a fender logo on it, on just about any body and hodge podge of components and its technically not incorrect. Or are we going to hide those headstock pics too?


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

Milkman said:


> Let's just say, if I sell you a partcaster it won't have a Fender logo on the headstock.





sulphur said:


> Some do though.


I sold this a few months back, informing the buyer that it's parts.
No serial # on it.


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

Milkman said:


> Let's just say, if I sell you a partcaster it won't have a Fender logo on the headstock.


Honestly,I dont think id care either way about the decal if the seller is honest..From the time ive spent on this site,i was under the impression alot of these parts caster builds are probably better overall guitars and built with more care and attention to details than factory fenders,(at least i hope so for what ive seen them sell for)..but ive never played any of them.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

laristotle said:


> I sold this a few months back, informing the buyer that it's parts.
> No serial # on it.
> View attachment 377481
> 
> View attachment 377482


Ya, I don't have an issue with them. I traded for a partscaster myself in here.


----------



## knight_yyz (Mar 14, 2015)

As long as it is advertised what it really is, I could not care less. If it is misrepresented, i do have a problem with that


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

laristotle said:


> I sold this a few months back, informing the buyer that it's parts.
> No serial # on it.
> View attachment 377481
> 
> View attachment 377482


i'd put a warmoth neck up against any fender neck i ever played, stock vs. stock.


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

Mine had the micro truss adjustment as well.


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

Another seller that realized that his chibson's a piece of garbage.








Kijiji - Buy, Sell & Save with Canada's #1 Local Classifieds


Visit Kijiji Classifieds to buy, sell, or trade almost anything! New and used items, cars, real estate, jobs, services, vacation rentals and more virtually anywhere.




www.kijiji.ca





_Gibson replica. Good pickups, but would need new pots, nut and tuners. Bridge is decent. Want that Les Paul? Want that les paul with a nice bookend headstock and still cost less than an ugly epi even after upgrades. Here is your chance! Slim neck very playable. See if your friends can tell. Regardless it looks beautiful on your wall. Probably has less flaws that real Gibsons these days  Nice green with zebra pups and cream pickguard....you know you want it! _


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

laristotle said:


> Mine had the micro truss adjustment as well.
> View attachment 377506


How did you like the micro adjust feature?


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

Fraud is fraud. Chinese counterfeits are fugazis. They are not "replica" guitars. They are not "partscasters" or "tributes". They are massed produced counterfeits, feeding either organized crime or a black market, and like all counterfeit products, are damaging economies (except communist China's economy). They are technically illegal to import, and they get seized at the border if discovered. They should not be allowed to be sold on any forum that has a conscience. I'm surprised it's allowed here, disclosure or not. Anyone who values the original brands should be ashamed. Greed is a helluva drug...


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

Grainslayer said:


> How did you like the micro adjust feature?


I'm pretty good at setting up a guitar.
When I thought that that Strat was perfect, I did a little tweak with the micro and was amazed that it made it even better.
It reminded me of the 70's stereo receivers that had a micro tuner knob that brought in stations perfectly.


----------



## Arek (Jan 24, 2009)

Grainslayer said:


> I guess every partscaster made with non authentic fender parts shouldnt be allowed then?? Or at least pics??


What if the partscaster has original neck only and the rest is non-licenced?


----------



## Arek (Jan 24, 2009)

BlueRocker said:


> So a thread in the for sale section discussing sale of a Chinese knock-off Gibson Les Paul went poof earlier today (fair enough it was way off topic).


I was the OP and asked Admin to remove it as it was taken way off topic and into dangerous territory.
Just to clarify.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I'm not suggesting that there's any attempt to deceive or conceal what's what when people are buying and selling partscasters.

I just draw my personal line at actually APPLYING a faked logo. There's a lot of grey area.

You have a nice old Fender and the logo has been damaged. What's wrong with having someone apply a replacement? Nothing I guess.

But if I buy a Mighty Mite or Warmoth neck I wouldn't put Fender on the headstock, even though the neck may be superior to some Fender necks.


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

I see a Partscaster, and think, nice. I see a Chibson and get offended. Why?? Completely irrational, and totally double standard. I suppose because Gibson products are so much harder to replicate. I've built a few parts Strats and Tele's. Not sure I could wrangle the skill set to create a Gibby. There are plenty who can though. There is a thread over in the "Guitar Building/Mods/Repair" section documenting that very process now. And I am absolutely glued to. The major difference is the builder is not trying to rip off a Gibson. The Chibson's that say "Gibson" on the headstock is the breaking point for me I suppose. Same as a Fender decal on a Partscaster. A buddy of mine is constantly building/tinkering with Strats/Teles. He always adds the decal. I hate it, and I tell him so. They use waaaaaay better components than a normal Fender, and sound/play killer! I asked him why he makes "better than Fender" then adds the decal. "I think it looks better. Completes the look". He would never, ever pass one off as an authentic Fender, but he can't control the what the next guy does. The few I've built don't have it, but if I sell them, the next guy can surely add it themselves.

This is an age old issue with fakes, tributes, replicas... call it what you will, justify it how you'd like.

In our little world, as long as we are disclosing, I suppose the current rules are doing their job. Having said that, if that Chibson listed by @Arek was not disclosed, you guys would have spotted it immediately, and ripped it apart. Those of us not as versed in this are lucky to be surrounded by those who are.

Carry on.


----------



## isoneedacoffee (Oct 31, 2014)

Squawk said:


> Greed is a helluva drug...


So is vanity. I think it’s sad that people want so badly to be associated with a brand that they’re willing to fake it.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

I've reworked the Gibson logo for fake Gibson's. Would this work?


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

isoneedacoffee said:


> So is vanity. I think it’s sad that people want so badly to be associated with a brand that they’re willing to fake it.


That's like any other fake. A Coach purse, Ray Ban sunglasses, Hilfiger stuff... 

I'm doing just fine in my Calvin Kleen underpants!


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

Arek said:


> What if the partscaster has original neck only and the rest is non-licenced?


i have no idea.lol


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)




----------



## Cups (Jan 5, 2010)

There’s lots of partscasters with Fender decals on the headstock. Amp kits with a Marshall badge on them too. No one bats an eyelash at those though. Why? Because Gibsons are high resellers that keep their value and often sell for more than the purchase price after a few years. The “Chibsons” interfere with the buyer/seller/flipper hobby that many of you so enjoy. There’s more than a little hypocrisy


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

SWLABR said:


> That's like any other fake. A Coach purse, Ray Ban sunglasses, Hilfiger stuff...
> 
> I'm doing just fine in my Calvin Kleen underpants!


I think we live in a time where people have such an inflated idea of how great it must be to own expensive things, how much envy/approval they will receive from others if they have them, that they obsess about labels, brands etc. I know some people who are so proud of the brands they wear, and wouldnt wear anything else, that ive said to them "...do you have an endorsement deal or something?".


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

There is a difference between the fake/counterfeit Chinese junk and a quality reproduction of something. It applies to guitars, car brake rotors, or replacement batteries for my Makita drill. Off brand brake rotors that meet OEM specs work well, but they're not sold in a BMW box. Fake rotors sold in a BMW box could be worse then the off brand make because they don't have to upkeep a corporate reputation. They use the BMW reputation, but can get away with selling junk because there is no recourse when they fail.
One is junk built with the sole purpose of stealing your money in exchange for the promise of a product that is cheaper and just as good but in reality is junk.

Google fake Chinese avionics, or BMW parts. In the 90s 2000s there was a huge problem with this stuff. Still is, a lot of crap sold direct from China on Amazon is fake and then they break and people give them bad reviews.

A few years ago there were even fake Epiphone LP Customs, made from MDF. Epiphone even warned of these fakes on their website at one point.

Fake Fender custom shops show up on kijiji once in a while too... they look junky. Could be made with plywood or mdf, is there even a truss rod in there?? TOTALLY different from someone's partscaster made from mighty might or warmoth. People need to see that distinction...imho.


----------



## zztomato (Nov 19, 2010)

Cups said:


> There’s lots of partscasters with Fender decals on the headstock. Amp kits with a Marshall badge on them too. No one bats an eyelash at those though. Why?


There is no justification for putting a manufacturer's logo on a product that they didn't make. I don't know why people get so bent out of shape over a faked Gibson but then give a pass to putting a fender decal on a partscaster. It makes zero sense.

This thread was started due to that Chibson for sale the other day. There were a few people who seemed to think that these are decent enough guitars and better than an Epiphone. That is complete bullshit. Occasionally someone brings me in a Chibson to do a setup on so I get to give these things a good look. They are crap. They require a lot of work to even play half decent. The fretwork is the worst you can get- buy one in the dry winter months and you will find out just how bad it is. The materials are the cheapest available to the crooks that make these things. DO NOT BUY THEM! Don't support such a crap industry. People justify the purchase because they can't afford the prices Gibson demands but they really want to play a Gibson for the look. If you do this it just makes you look like a joke- (so does putting a F logo on your partscaster, BTW). There are SO many decent guitars made by companies that actually care about making a good guitar for folks in a certain price bracket. Support those companies. They have your back with a warranty and customer service. 
In general it's good to think about who you are supporting when purchasing goods. You are enabling whoever gets your money.


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

zztomato said:


> There are SO many decent guitars made by companies that actually care about making a good guitar for folks in a certain price bracket. Support those companies. They have your back with a warranty and customer service.
> In general it's good to think about who you are supporting when purchasing goods. You are enabling whoever gets your money.


I think that's who really gets hurt - the legit companies making their own good guitars at modest prices. Gibson isn't losing out if you buy a $199 Chibson, because you were never going to spring for their products anyway. But Gretsch, Godin, Ibanez, Squier etc are losing a potential sale of a better instrument.

Glad to hear someone with first hand experience talking about the quality (or lack thereof). Not every guitar shaped object can get a minor tweak and be playing like a $3000 instrument.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Cups said:


> There’s lots of partscasters with Fender decals on the headstock. Amp kits with a Marshall badge on them too. No one bats an eyelash at those though.


I think if you check, you'll find out that some of us do indeed bat more than an eyelid.

Again, copying old designs that are public domain is one thing.

Faking the logo has meaning to me at least.

If there's hypocracy in what I'm doing or saying in this context, maybe that's something I need to work on, but as I said, you won't find any Phenders or Marshulls in my home.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

BlueRocker said:


> They just seem a little sad.



Not necessarily.

My Tele is a Partscaster. I used a Squire body and a MIM Fender neck. That neck was purchased directly from Fender and came with both a logo and a serial number. 

I don't pass it off as real, and openly state that it is a Partscaster. Leo made his guitars so that parts could be easily swapped, and people continue to do that. 

So long as one is not passing it off as a legit Fender, I don't see them as sad.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Milkman said:


> Faking the logo has meaning to me at least.



What if the logo isn't faked, as described in my post above?

As I said, I openly describe the guitar as a Partscaster but it does say 'Fender' on it.


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

colchar said:


> Not necessarily.
> 
> My Tele is a Partscaster. I used a Squire body and a MIM Fender neck. That neck was purchased directly from Fender and came with both a logo and a serial number.
> 
> ...


i think i might consider this a real fender...


----------



## zztomato (Nov 19, 2010)

colchar said:


> What if the logo isn't faked, as described in my post above?
> 
> As I said, I openly describe the guitar as a Partscaster but it does say 'Fender' on it.


yeah, nothing wrong with that. If the part was made by Fender it's not faked.


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

colchar said:


> Not necessarily.
> 
> My Tele is a Partscaster. I used a Squire body and a MIM Fender neck. That neck was purchased directly from Fender and came with both a logo and a serial number.
> 
> ...


I think aprime example of "sad" is taking a Squire neck, sanding off the decal and applying a Fender one. That might be even sadder then putting a Fender decal on an AllParts neck.

Here's my partscaster. Genuine Fender MIM neck, genuine Gibson Burstbucker pickups, genuine poplar body. 
If I ever sell it it's a "Tstyle" partscaster.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

tomee2 said:


> I think an example of "sad" is taking a Squire neck, sanding of the decal and applying a Fender one.
> That might be even sadder then putting a Fender decal on an AllParts neck.



And yet there are plenty of YouTube clips showing how to do just that, and seemingly, some acceptance of it as perfectly fine.

I have nothing against Fender, but that brand logo doesn't make me think, hey, it's a better or superior guitar.

Frankly, if I was lucky enough to own let's say for example, a @zztomato built guitar or a Brian Monty, I would want their names on it, not Fender or Gibson (even if either was inclined to do that, which I doubt).

I'm not judging anyone else. That's just my opinion.


----------



## Cups (Jan 5, 2010)

My Warmoth tele has the Warmoth decal on the headstock.
And I bought a Chibson 12 string Les Paul. I didn’t know it said Gibson on it though as it wasn’t pictured. Nobody would mistake this thing for a Gibson though. The headstock was HuGe!! I had a luthier friend reshape the headstock into more of a explorer type shape. It’s unique and plays and looks great. 
So where do I stand on this whole debate? Depends I guess. 
I believe people are taking this too personally because it involves a beloved (and very expensive) hobby.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

zztomato said:


> There is no justification for putting a manufacturer's logo on a product that they didn't make. I don't know why people get so bent out of shape over a faked Gibson but then give a pass to putting a fender decal on a partscaster. It makes zero sense.


^ I completely agree with this!


zztomato said:


> ...There were a few people who seemed to think that these are decent enough guitars and better than an Epiphone. That is complete bullshit....


^ I completely disagree with this!

I don't deny there aren't crap Chibsons out there (like any Chinese made guitar, it's the luck of the draw IMO). But my brother's Chibson I played for over a year (complete w/ a "Made in U.S.A." stamping) was as good as any Chinese made Epiphone I've ever played. Granted, I don't think it was stage worthy, but it could easily be made to be - just like any Chinese made Epiphone. Many of the non-Chinese made Epi LPs were stage worthy from my experience.


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

FatStrat2 said:


> But my brother's Chibson I played for over a year (complete w/ a "Made in U.S.A." stamping) was as good as any Chinese made Epiphone I've ever played. Granted, I don't think it was stage worthy, but it could easily be made to be - just like any Chinese made Epiphone.


Perhaps you have a limited reference knowledge here with one example.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

^ That's true, it was just the one.

But that guitar did happen. It was playable, stayed in tune and responded to intonation as well as any Chinese Epiphone I've played.


----------



## zztomato (Nov 19, 2010)

FatStrat2 said:


> ^ I completely disagree with this!
> 
> I don't deny there aren't crap Chibsons out there (like any Chinese made guitar, it's the luck of the draw IMO). But my brother's Chibson I played for over a year (complete w/ a "Made in U.S.A." stamping) was as good as any Chinese made Epiphone I've ever played. Granted, I don't think it was stage worthy, but it could easily be made to be - just like any Chinese made Epiphone. Many of the non-Chinese made Epi LPs were stage worthy from my experience.


You _completely _disagree based on one guitar compared to my experience with dozens?  Gee, thanks. 

You're kind of missing the point. I can force one of those f**kers to play well but I'm gluing down frets, re-doing solder joints, levelling frets, throwing out the cheap plastic nut and making a bone one- usually have to replace electrical components as well. God willing, the truss rod works. They are a pile of work that I really can't charge enough for. Maybe you got one that went through my shop? 
I remember one guy who brought me one of these that he bought for about 400 shipped. He replaced all the electronics with USA made stuff, new pickups, and a bunch of labour for me to turn it into a good guitar. Hey, it was a good guitar when it left my shop. No idea if it will still be a good guitar in the near future. Why? Because they are poorly made. When you look inside you can just tell they are poorly built- shitty wood, big gaps all over the place. He probably spent $1000 making that thing into a decent sounding and playing guitar. Guess what? He could've bought any number of decent used Gibson guitars- an SG, LP Studio, and many others I'm sure close to that price point. _And, _you don't have to worry about a Gibson falling apart after a couple of years. You can also get a brand new upper tier Epiphone with full warranty and pickups you don't have to replace because they actually sound good.

And then there's all the great Japanese guitar makers who make an excellent copy of a Les Paul. They don't pretend it's a Gibson though, they proudly display their name on the headstock.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

hypothetically speaking, what % of a guitar must be original in order to still be entitled to rightfully maintain its logo?
If for example, a Gibson gets a makeover treatment...new fretboard, new top, re-finish, pups, hardware, caps/rewiring etc is it really still a Gibson, any more than if I just _somehow_ managed to buy a plank of wood and a decal from Gibson?

we're fortunate that we live in an age where noone who paid for all that work would hide it as it likely increases its value (unless they're trying to pass it off as true vintage), but its an interesting ethical wormhole.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

FatStrat2 said:


> ^ I completely agree with this!
> 
> ^ I completely disagree with this!
> 
> I don't deny there aren't crap Chibsons out there (like any Chinese made guitar, it's the luck of the draw IMO). But my brother's Chibson I played for over a year (complete w/ a "Made in U.S.A." stamping) was as good as any Chinese made Epiphone I've ever played. Granted, I don't think it was stage worthy, but it could easily be made to be - just like any Chinese made Epiphone. Many of the non-Chinese made Epi LPs were stage worthy from my experience.


I got duped into buying a zakk wylde chibson on ebay long ago when less was known about them-12-13 years ago.
Its really not that bad of a guitar. the biggest differences I saw were in the hardware....the tuners were the worst I have ever had, not being fussy, they just had so much play in them they were unusable. the gold finish rubbed off easily. the fake EMG HZ pups were about the same as genuine HZ's. the bridge isnt on the correct angle, but I cant say that its affected any playabilty. the only other differences I noticed are cosmetic....incorrect binding for example.

Objectively, Its not a bad guitar, worth about what I paid for it and looks the part, aside from the zero resale value...but I hate it bc it reminds me of a time when I got taken by someone.


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

BlueRocker said:


> I think that's who really gets hurt - the legit companies making their own good guitars at modest prices. Gibson isn't losing out if you buy a $199 Chibson, because you were never going to spring for their products anyway. But Gretsch, Godin, Ibanez, Squier etc are losing a potential sale of a better instrument.
> 
> Glad to hear someone with first hand experience talking about the quality (or lack thereof). Not every guitar shaped object can get a minor tweak and be playing like a $3000 instrument.


Of course Gibson is losing out when someone buys a Chinese fake! Are you kidding? It tarnishes their brand. They have to spend tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees each year to protect that brand, and they undoubtedly try and stop the importation of these massed produced counterfeit guitars.

Guess who ultimately pays for that? The legitimate Gibson customer.


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

I think he meant Gibson isn't losing the direct sale as a $400 buyer wasn't planning to be a Gibson guitar customer. 
The indirect loss...I agree with you.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

Diablo said:


> ...Its really not that bad of a guitar. the biggest differences I saw were in the hardware....the tuners were the worst I have ever had, not being fussy, they just had so much play in them they were unusable. the gold finish rubbed off easily. the fake EMG HZ pups were about the same as genuine HZ's. the bridge isnt on the correct angle, but I cant say that its affected any playabilty. the only other differences I noticed are cosmetic....incorrect binding for example.
> 
> Objectively, Its not a bad guitar, worth about what I paid for it and looks the part, aside from the zero resale value...but I hate it bc it reminds me of a time when I got taken by someone.


Yes, my experience exactly. I've played Chinese Epiphones with similar garbage hardware on good body/necks. It's a no-brainer that there are poor quality Chibsons, but it's faulty thinking to assume they all are. IMO, if you play it beforehand and you know how to evaluate a guitar and like it, get it.


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

tomee2 said:


> I think he meant Gibson isn't losing the direct sale as a $400 buyer wasn't planning to be a Gibson guitar customer.
> The indirect loss...I agree with you.


Of course, totally different type of customer, but I’m sure that’s not Gibson’s biggest concern here. They are basically fighting a battle against Chinese organized crime (and government), that’s counterfeiting on a mass scale, and causing confusion in the marketplace.

For a company that’s already struggling, that’s got to hurt.


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

FatStrat2 said:


> Yes, my experience exactly. I've played Chinese Epiphones with similar garbage hardware on good body/necks. It's a no-brainer that there are poor quality Chibsons, but it's faulty thinking to assume they all are. IMO, if you play it beforehand and you know how to evaluate a guitar and like it, get it.


Trouble is how do you play before buying online from Alibaba? Because that's how they get here


----------



## zztomato (Nov 19, 2010)

FatStrat2 said:


> It's a no-brainer that there are poor quality Chibsons, but it's faulty thinking to assume they all are.


Really? I think for my own protection I'll assume that they all suck. I'm content with my "faulty" thinking.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

^ I'm so glad.


tomee2 said:


> Trouble is how do you play before buying online from Alibaba? Because that's how they get here


Yes, that is an issue. The one I tried I didn't buy, it's the same for all those Chinese made Epiphones too. But IMO, it's a crapshoot like anything you buy before try, some better than others of course.

As others have posted, if one buys these specific guitars, then that player has a reason they want a "Gibson" on a phoney. Especially when there are other Chinese guitars with about the same quality and the same price.


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

FatStrat2 said:


> ^ I'm so glad.
> Yes, that is an issue. The one I tried I didn't buy, it's the same for all those Chinese made Epiphones too. But IMO, it's a crapshoot like anything you buy before try, some better than others of course.
> 
> As others have posted, if one buys these specific guitars, then that player has a reason they want a "Gibson" on a phoney. Especially when there are other Chinese guitars with about the same quality and the same price.


I almost agree with that.. except even companies like Agile or ESP or other companies that use china to build LP-looking guitars have uniform quality standards. like no mdf necks. Real trussrods. Frets not made of melted tin cans. The fakers have no quality standards... they show you a picture on Alibaba that looks pretty good, then send you something made from recycled pallet wood. I mean you don't actually know ahead of time what you're going to get. 
Maybe some are actually built using real seasoned wood and proper materials, but if they're doing that they might as well put their own name on them and build up their own brand, like Eastman did.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Dave, of Daves World of Fun Stuff won't take these basket cases in anymore to work on.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

tomee2 said:


> I almost agree with that.. except even companies like Agile or ESP or other companies that use china to build LP-looking guitars have uniform quality standards. like no mdf necks. Real trussrods. Frets not made of melted tin cans. The fakers have no quality standards... they show you a picture on Alibaba that looks pretty good, then send you something made from recycled pallet wood. I mean you don't actually know ahead of time what you're going to get.
> Maybe some are actually built using real seasoned wood and proper materials, but if they're doing that they might as well put their own name on them and build up their own brand, like Eastman did.


I can mostly agree with that too.

The Chibson body I played was obviously made of mahogany, but I couldn't tell what sort of top it had despite digging under the pickups. I've heard that some Chinese guitar makers, not just Chibsons, used to actually photograph a flamed maple top and glue it to the top of some whatever wood/pulp veneer sheet which would then be laminated to the top of the body and painted over. Classic.

As to putting their real name on it instead of fake Gibson. My experience, including the recently closed Chibson FS thread that sold in about a week on this site, has shown me that it's far easier to sell or resell a Chinese made guitar w/ "Gibson" on the headstock than an unknown Chinese brand single-cut LP. These manufacturers just want to move product and they don't give a damn how.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

FatStrat2 said:


> I can mostly agree with that too.
> 
> The Chibson body I played was obviously made of mahogany, but I couldn't tell what sort of top it had despite digging under the pickups. I've heard that some Chinese guitar makers, not just Chibsons, used to actually photograph a flamed maple top and glue it to the top of some whatever wood/pulp veneer sheet which would then be laminated to the top of the body and painted over. Classic.
> 
> As to putting their real name on it instead of fake Gibson. My experience, including the recently closed Chibson FS thread that sold in about a week on this site, has shown me that it's far easier to sell or resell a Chinese made guitar w/ "Gibson" on the headstock than an unknown Chinese brand single-cut LP. These manufacturers just want to move product and they don't give a damn how.


Fender did a "Foto Flame" in the '90s out of their MIJ line. I have a Jazz bass from that line.





__





Xhefri's Guitars - Fender Foto Flames







www.xhefriguitars.com


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

FatStrat2 said:


> These manufacturers just want to move product and they don't give a damn how.


And enablers like you are allowing it to continue. Shame.


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

Fender did a "Foto Flame" in the '90s out of their MIJ line.
[/QUOTE said:


> I remember reading about the Fender "Hamburgler" Foto Flame.lol


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Ya, he's on that bass in several spots.


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

sulphur said:


> Ya, he's on that bass in several spots.


😄


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

laristotle said:


> And enablers like you are allowing it to continue. Shame.


Pffft. Unlike my brother, I don't buy & sell Chibsons - or any Chinese guitar.


----------



## Paul Running (Apr 12, 2020)

This will be the most common label on consumer goods in the near future:


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

There's one for sale nearby. Seller claims "It is an awesome playing guitar it won’t disappoint ". I'm going to try it out and double my experience.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

FatStrat2 said:


> There's one for sale nearby. Seller claims "It is an awesome playing guitar it won’t disappoint ". I'm going to try it out and double my experience.


I thought that you weren't interested in Chinese guitars?


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

^ Yes, you are correct, I will not be buying (but I won't be telling him that). Just an off tangent FYI: Since about '96 I've purged most Chinese made things from my life except for this bloody computer I'm writing this on and a couple pieces of IKEA furniture I don't want to part with (plus a pair of Nikes I really like). It wasn't easy or cheap, believe me.

I'll only waste 20 minutes of the seller's time. But some posters had a point that I only have 1 year experience with that one decent Chibson guitar (though I'm pretty sure that's more experience than most have with these phoneys).

I'll give a full review when I try it, probably this weekend. It's the owner of a pawn shop I called up and he says he can't really put it up for sale, but he's willing to let me try it out. I have a feeling it will play just fine given his partial enthusiasm for it (he's a musician too).


----------



## GuitarT (Nov 23, 2010)

tomee2 said:


> I think aprime example of "sad" is taking a Squire neck, sanding off the decal and applying a Fender one. That might be even sadder then putting a Fender decal on an AllParts neck.


I've got one. It was done by the previous owner and it was fully disclosed when it was sold to me. It's a Jazzmaster model that was only available under the Squier name so I'm not sure who he was trying to kid. I'm not sure what I'm going to do with it as quite honestly it doesn't bother me. If I ever sell it the decal will be removed.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Diablo said:


> hypothetically speaking, what % of a guitar must be original in order to still be entitled to rightfully maintain its logo?


Ship of Theseus.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Squawk said:


> Of course Gibson is losing out when someone buys a Chinese fake! Are you kidding? It tarnishes their brand. They have to spend tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees each year to protect that brand, and they undoubtedly try and stop the importation of these massed produced counterfeit guitars.
> 
> Guess who ultimately pays for that? The legitimate Gibson customer.


You're talking about the company that made a signature model of a clone.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

Here's another nearby, he's advertising it as a fake, but there's nothing fake about his asking price - $600!


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

colchar said:


> You're talking about the company that made a signature model of a clone.


If you want to defend an *illegal* black market that hurts legitimate makers, and props up organized crime, and emboldens the Communist regime and their global economic and military power, then there’s no point in even engaging with you on this. It’s not going to get through.

Guitars are a very small piece of the larger pattern and picture with China’s counterfeiting and corporate theft.


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

The Impact of China's Illicit Economies to U.S. National Security


Defending and Investing in U.S.




www.linkedin.com





Considering that Canada has at least two political prisoners locked up in China at the moment, Hong Kong democratic institutions have been crushed, Taiwan is under threat, the Uyghurs are being sent to concentration camps and tortured and killed, and the South China Sea is a potential conflict zone with China building fake islands to claim more territory and install military bases, I’d be thinking about it before clicking a purchase link on dhgate for a cheap fake Gibson. We are all part of the problem, but let’s at least get the obvious and easy stuff right.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

If it says Gibson, Fender or whatever, and isn't?
That's wrong in my mind--no matter excuse.
If it says something else?
As long as it is not presented as being something it isn't--that's okay--it's a copy or a replica with its own brand name--okay.
I don't get what hiding the headstock on a fake accomplishes.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Squawk said:


> If you want to defend an *illegal* black market that hurts legitimate makers, and props up organized crime, and emboldens the Communist regime and their global economic and military power, then there’s no point in even engaging with you on this. It’s not going to get through.



Please point out where I did that. I'll be waiting.

All I did was point out that Gibson made a signature model of a clone (the sig model they made based on Slash's Derrig), because they did - and they made a shitload of money off of that clone.





> Guitars are a very small piece of the larger pattern and picture with China’s counterfeiting and corporate theft.


Thanks for the newsflash.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Squawk said:


> The Impact of China's Illicit Economies to U.S. National Security
> 
> 
> Defending and Investing in U.S.
> ...


How the fuck are we all part of the problem? I don't buy counterfeit guitars, all my Gibsons are real.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

zontar said:


> If it says Gibson, Fender or whatever, and isn't?
> That's wrong in my mind--no matter excuse.



Generally I agree but again, what about a Partscaster like my Tele? I bought the neck from Fender (via L&M) and Fender sent it to me with a decal on the front and a legit serial number on the back. I did not ask for those, the manufacturer just provided them. 

Mine is a Squier body and Fender neck, so both main parts are made by Fender. Actually all of the parts are made by Fender except for the pickups (Vinehams). I do not pass it off as a Fender, I claim it is a Partscaster because that's what it is.

Am I in the wrong?


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

colchar said:


> How the fuck are we all part of the problem? I don't buy counterfeit guitars, all my Gibsons are real.


Almost everything is made in China these days (electronics, household, etc.), it's absolultely impossible to avoid. We all want to spend as little as possible, understandably. So we are not all part of the counterfeiting problem, but we all are part of building up the Chinese economy, and in the process enabling the communist government of China to continue unchallenged. Got an iPhone? I do. I'm part of the problem, since Apple moved that part of manufacturing to China. But I won't buy counterfeit items, that's easy enough to not do.


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

colchar said:


> Generally I agree but again, what about a Partscaster like my Tele? I bought the neck from Fender (via L&M) and Fender sent it to me with a decal on the front and a legit serial number on the back. I did not ask for those, the manufacturer just provided them.
> 
> Mine is a Squier body and Fender neck, so both main parts are made by Fender. Actually all of the parts are made by Fender except for the pickups (Vinehams). I do not pass it off as a Fender, I claim it is a Partscaster because that's what it is.
> 
> Am I in the wrong?


Not at all. You're not a factory pumping out fakes to flood the market with. Partscasters and tribute builds are not in the same category at all in my opinion, as long as the info is presented accurately. Some may disagree with that, but it comes down to source and intent.

If someone is misrepresenting something for sale on the market, that's a different scenario.


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

colchar said:


> Please point out where I did that. I'll be waiting.
> 
> All I did was point out that Gibson made a signature model of a clone (the sig model they made based on Slash's Derrig), because they did - and they made a shitload of money off of that clone.
> 
> ...


Your comment was implying (intended or not) that what Gibson did (which I assume was not illegal?) was in some way comparable to counterfeiting, which is in part minimizing it by comparison.

I'm not here to argue or get personal. I've made my points. You're welcome for the news (not a flash) Apparently some people aren't aware, are completely blind to it, just don't care, or don't understand the basic facts, so it's worth pointing out. I'm glad you are socially and economically aware, not everyone is. Have a nice weekend.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

Squawk said:


> ...Almost everything is made in China these days (electronics, household, etc.), it's absolultely impossible to avoid...


That's not entirely true.

IMO, it's very difficult to get to live a 100% Chinese-free consumer life, but a person can get to at least 90% if they're diligent. Most of my electronics are Japanese or Korean, but they most certainly have a few internal Chinese parts I can't avoid. On the other hand, if I crack open my Made in Indonesia guitar and discover Chinese pots, I realize it's too late, but I'll still replace them w/ Korean or Japanese pots. What I think it comes down to is consumers are lazy and like the convenience of addictive inexpensive Chinese products raining down on them.

Until they change their bullying business practices, just say no to Chinese stuff.


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

FatStrat2 said:


> That's not entirely true.
> 
> IMO, it's very difficult to get to live a 100% Chinese-free consumer life, but a person can get to at least 90% if they're diligent. Most of my electronics are Japanese or Korean, but they most certainly have a few internal Chinese parts I can't avoid. On the other hand, if I crack open my Made in Indonesia guitar and discover Chinese pots, I realize it's too late, but I'll still replace them w/ Korean or Japanese pots. What I think it comes down to is consumers are lazy and like the convenience of addictive inexpensive Chinese products raining down on them.
> 
> Until they change their bullying business practices, just say no to Chinese stuff.


Great points. I find it difficult with a lot of computer related products, especially with a lot of manufacturing being contracted in China now. For my studio and equipment I rely on, even companies like SSL have now shifted their manufacturing from the UK to China for their newer products. A lot of the rest of it is parts and components, as you point out. I’ve avoided as much as possible, but you’re right, we have to be more aware and diligent as consumers.


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

colchar said:


> Please point out where I did that. I'll be waiting.
> 
> All I did was point out that Gibson made a signature model of a clone (the sig model they made based on Slash's Derrig), because they did - and they made a shitload of money off of that clone.
> ......


Slash's guitar wasn't a Chinese made fake.
Gibson made a copy of what was their guitar design to start with. The guitar they copied was built almost exactly the way their's were built, with similar woods etc. Gibson didn't have recreate an MDF bodied pallet wood neck polyurethane covered hunk of junk, that is what a Chibson might be.

Slash's guitar always comes up in defense of (or comparison to) Chinese fakes but they are completely different categories of "copies". One high quality copy is not the same as a a factory pumping out garbage with Gibson on the headstock.

The issue with the (not seen before buying over the internet) Chinese fakes is the high potential to be promised a guitar that looks and feels like a Gibson for $350, but when it shows up on your doorstep is a piece of crap.


----------



## 2manyGuitars (Jul 6, 2009)

Squawk said:


> ...Chinese organized crime (and government), that’s counterfeiting on a mass scale, and causing confusion in the marketplace.


Fender does that all on their own. And I think that has something to do with why Partscasters are hard to fit into this conversation.

When I see an instrument with Gibson on the headstock, there’s only one thing that it should be. It either is or it isn’t. If I see a Fender, it could be American, Japanese, Mexican, Korean, maybe aftermarket but licensed by Fender, it could be any combination of any of those or none of those. Fender had diluted its own brand so much, it makes it tough to figure things out.

Anytime I see any Fender for sale, I usually start with the assumption that anything on it could have been changed.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

My hot take:
I think the problem of counterfeiting is compounded when the product is of good (or better quality). In the sense of the "homages" or replica's, they seem to get a free pass. Why? Someone with $10k for a Bartlett or whomever could have bought a Gibson CC #x, or Murphy, or whatever, instead, so it actually _is_ money out of their (gibsons) pocket, albeit on a small scale. 

I'd argue that most low end chibsons, while I dont like them, when disclosed, would not have been considered by someone who actually would have bought a real one so arent really in competition, any more than a Fiero kit car for $20k likely steals any deals from Ferrari. 

The Chibson victim is the duped buyer, not Gibson....in a way, Gibson PROFITS from it, because while a plethora of fakes on the market could lead to a softening in the second hand market (fears of getting scammed), it may actually steer someone to buying a new one from an AD instead. Again, the customer is the loser (due to reduced resale value), not Gibson.

Gibson's used to copyright problems...they go way back when almost anyone who made a set neck (and occasionally bolt on) single cut with HB's would put Les Paul decals on them, even without the gibson logo. IMO, that name was worth more than Gibsons ever was.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Squawk said:


> Your comment was implying (intended or not) that what Gibson did (which I assume was not illegal?) was in some way comparable to counterfeiting, which is in part minimizing it by comparison.


No it wasn't, except in your imagination.

I was merely pointing out that they made a sig model of a copy and made a ton of money from it. So they were willing to ignore copyright issues when it suited them. 




> I'm not here to argue or get personal.



Yes, you clearly are.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

tomee2 said:


> Slash's guitar wasn't a Chinese made fake.
> Gibson made a copy of what was their guitar design to start with. The guitar they copied was built almost exactly the way their's were built, with similar woods etc. Gibson didn't have recreate an MDF bodied pallet wood neck polyurethane covered hunk of junk, that is what a Chibson might be.



I know that, but the fact remains that they made a Gisbon signature version of a copy.





> Slash's guitar always comes up in defense of (or comparison to) Chinese fakes but they are completely different categories of "copies". One high quality copy is not the same as a a factory pumping out garbage with Gibson on the headstock.


I never said it was, nor did I compare it to the Chinese crap. I just pointed out that Gibson made a signature version of a copy - one that even had 'Gibson' on its headstock in violation of their copyright - because they did.





> The issue with the (not seen before buying over the internet) Chinese fakes is the high potential to be promised a guitar that looks and feels like a Gibson for $350, but when it shows up on your doorstep is a piece of crap.


If someone is stupid enough to believe that it will look and feel like a real Gibson then I have no sympathy for them. The buyers are those who want the image but can't afford the real thing, or who want to spout off about what a graet deal they got and how they are so much smarter than those who paid thousands for the real thing. I have no sympathy for any of them.


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

If Chibsons are illegal to import, then they probably shouldn't be allowed to be posted for sale. One difference with the "partscasters" is that alot of these parts are made under fender licencing which I assume means that fender is getting their cut and approve of the quality of these parts?? Thats kinda the reason I posted the slash paul..Lots of people just assume its a Gibson made les paul.(I wonder if Gibson ever went after the builder or just said fuck it,easier just to cash in on sales while they were hot). I think "parts" guitars can quite often be built with better attention to detail and offer more options to the player.I dont think the same can be said about a Chibson. Personally,i like aftermarket fender decals on partscasters.Kinda completes an otherwise empty spot.Ive seen some cool ones where builders got creative and made up their own names in the spaghetti logo font which can look cool.Ive seen Alot of partscasters here that seemed to be awesome guitars,and owned by multiple forum owners that back the quality/playability..Honesty in what your selling is a big part of it.Do companies like Nash/suhr ect have to pay royalties to Fender?Probably not but they clearly are making money off of building clones..But the quality seems to there and nobody is pretending its a real fender.

I just learned Jerry Cantrell has a new Les Paul signature which makes sense since he has built his carreer playing G&Ls lol...


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

colchar said:


> No it wasn't, except in your imagination.
> 
> I was merely pointing out that they made a sig model of a copy and made a ton of money from it. So they were willing to ignore copyright issues when it suited them.
> 
> Yes, you clearly are.


Actually I’m really not, but you seem to have a chip on your shoulder, so I’m done with this conversation since you want to go there. I think most people reading your comment would logically draw an inference with Gibson’s actions, and counterfeiters in China. As well, I highly doubt that Gibson was “ignoring copyright issues” on what I assume was their own design patents in the first place. However, that comment proves the point that you were making the inference.

The fact that Gibson capitalized on a “copy” of their own design has no bearing on the conversation. That’s exactly what they should have done in that situation… It’s their IP! They weren’t “ignoring copyright issues” at all, just the opposite. They were reclaiming their IP from the sound of it, and protecting their brand, which is exactly what they needed to do (IP law 101).

Gibson would not be outside the arm of litigation if they broke any IP laws in North America (which I can assume they did not). This is not the case with Chinese counterfeiters, where it would be up to the Communist government to take any action, as it’s unlikely Gibson would have much if any recourse within China.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Squawk said:


> Actually I’m really not



Methinks you doth protest too much.




> but you seem to have a chip on your shoulder


Nope, just defending myself against your complete micharacterization of what I had said.





> I think most people reading your comment would logically draw an inference with Gibson’s actions, and counterfeiters in China.


Not if they understood what I was referring to. Which does beg the question - do you understand the situation you are arguing about? One does have to wonder.




> As well, I highly doubt that Gibson was “ignoring copyright issues” on what I assume was their own design patents in the first place.


Um yes, they were.

Derrig built Slash a replica Les Paul that said 'Gibson' on the headstock. It was, in every way, a violation of Gibsons patents and copyrights. But because Slash became uber famous and Gibson saw an opportunity to make money off it, they ignored Derrig's infringement and put out their own signature version of his copy.




> However, that comment proves the point that you were making the inference.


No, it does not. It merely demonstrates that Gibson was willing to ignore infringement of their copyright by that particular builder.




> The fact that Gibson capitalized on a “copy” of their own design has no bearing on the conversation. That’s exactly what they should have done in that situation… It’s their IP! They weren’t “ignoring copyright issues” at all, just the opposite. They were reclaiming their IP from the sound of it, and protecting their brand, which is exactly what they needed to do (IP law 101).


They selectively protected their IP. They go after counterfeiters (as they should), but ignore copyright infringement when it suits them.


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

colchar said:


> Derrig built Slash a replica Les Paul that said 'Gibson' on the headstock. It was, in every way, a violation of Gibsons patents and copyrights. But because Slash became uber famous and Gibson saw an opportunity to make money off it, they ignored Derrig's infringement and put out their own signature version of his copy.


Apperantly not the case. Slash's manager bought the guitar from a music store.Slash had nothing to do with it.


----------



## 2manyGuitars (Jul 6, 2009)

One way to take the Gibson/Slash/Derrig thing is...

Gibson sees an artist make it big and he’s using a copy/fake/homage/replica of one of their guitars. They eventually approach the artist and say “Hey, Since we’re the rightful makers of that design, let US build you one that’s legit. And we’ll make it a signature model and offer it for sale.”

They can’t rip off something that they already own.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Grainslayer said:


> Apperantly not the case.Slash's manager bought the guitar from a music store.Slash had nothing to do with it.



Fair enough.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

2manyGuitars said:


> One way to take the Gibson/Slash/Derrig thing is...
> 
> Gibson sees an artist make it big and he’s using a copy/fake/homage/replica of one of their guitars. They eventually approach the artist and say “Hey, Since we’re the rightful makers of that design, let US build you one that’s legit. And we’ll make it a signature model and offer it for sale.”
> 
> They can’t rip off something that they already own.



Yeah I'm not saying they ripped anything off, just that they issued a sig model of a copy/fake/homage/replica.

Come to think of it, that replica is arguably one of the most famous "Gibsons/Les Pauls" ever. Maybe in the top five, certainly in the top ten.


----------



## 2manyGuitars (Jul 6, 2009)

And as far as the one that was for sale here, no matter how honest the seller is (and I have ZERO doubt that he’s honest) that guitar WILL one day be sold as the real deal and someone will get ripped off. Any seller who says otherwise can simply engrave the word “REPLICA” on the back of the headstock. It will have absolutely no effect on the value and for all the aspiring rock stars who want the thrill of people seeing them play a Gibson, it will also not make one bit of difference.

Put up or shut up.
My offer to buy it and send it through a wood chipper was completely legit.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

This is interesting:


----------



## Grainslayer (Sep 26, 2016)

"CHITARS CANADA"...hopefully not.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

if you're going to make a case against buying chinese goods, where does that leave epiphone? i used to own an epi with the open book headstock on it. the truss rod cover said gibson on it. what about that guitar? that was back in the early 90's. i don't think there were chinese fakes back then, but i could be wrong. it was a legit epi, bought new at a sam ash in north carolina. afaik, they're quite collectible right now


----------



## Squawk (Jun 21, 2018)

colchar said:


> Not if they understood what I was referring to. Which does beg the question - do you understand the situation you are arguing about? One does have to wonder.


Please keep on wondering then. I think it's pretty clear to most people what inference you were making, and while it's a notable observation, it doesn't really hold up.



colchar said:


> Derrig built Slash a replica Les Paul that said 'Gibson' on the headstock. It was, in every way, a violation of Gibsons patents and copyrights. But because Slash became uber famous and Gibson saw an opportunity to make money off it, they ignored Derrig's infringement and put out their own signature version of his copy


Patents and _*trademarks*_ (not copyrights). Copyright law doesn't apply here. You need to understand what we are talking about first (which begs the question... 😉)



colchar said:


> No, it does not. It merely demonstrates that Gibson was willing to ignore infringement of their copyright by that particular builder.


Again, not really copyright infringement, infringement of registered patents and TM's - different thing.

You have to have some basic level understanding of how IP law works first before jumping to conclusions about Gibson's actions here. What are the circumstances? Was Derrig mass producing these instruments for distribution, or were these one off custom or small run tribute guitars? Gibson has to weigh their options. It's quite possible, and in fact likely, that Derrig did receive a cease and desist letter at one point from Gibson's legal department, but it's also unlikely that Gibson would have moved forward and take him to court over that. It's entirely possible that Derrig complied with any C&D notice Gibson sent (and very likely), in order to avoid any future legal action. The routine act of sending a cease and desist would comply with Gibson's legal obligations to protect their registered TM's and patents by serving formal notice to an offending party.

Considering the fact that Kris Derrig died in 1987, it's even less likely that Gibson was going to persue any legal action against him.

An extremely high quality "tribute" guitar played by Slash on Appetite would have also helped spotlight Gibson's brand, so there was a marketing upside for Gibson. They also now have Slash as an endorser (first "Gibson Global Brand Ambassador" - 2017). The fact that Gibson capitalized on this is again, exactly what they needed to do, and should be doing to protect their intellectual property. Again, this is IP law 101. Very basic stuff.

Happy to have a conversation, not so much wanting to get into snarky and personal digs with someone on a forum, so I'll leave it at that. I think this subtopic has pretty much been covered.


----------



## 2manyGuitars (Jul 6, 2009)

cheezyridr said:


> if you're going to make a case against buying chinese goods, where does that leave epiphone?


I don’t buy Chinese guitars, legit or not.

I was looking at a used Gretsch yesterday and that was my first question. It was made in Korea so I’m probably going to go check it out. If it had been Chinese, then I wait for the next one to pop up. Maybe it makes no sense as far as quality, tone, or playability but here we are.

Out of the thirty-some guitars I own, one is Chinese and it wasn’t on purpose. I own several other Supro guitars and they were all made in Indonesia. This one was bought new online from the US and I didn’t know until it arrived.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

cheezyridr said:


> if you're going to make a case against buying chinese goods, where does that leave epiphone? i used to own an epi with the open book headstock on it. the truss rod cover said gibson on it. what about that guitar? that was back in the early 90's. i don't think there were chinese fakes back then, but i could be wrong. it was a legit epi, bought new at a sam ash in north carolina. afaik, they're quite collectible right now


MIJ Epiphones came with the open book headstock, I owned two of them.
They were made for the Japanese domestic market, but some made their way over here.

I believe that they were made along side of the Epiphone Elitists, same factory.
Mine were great guitars, every bit as nice as a US Standard and certainly not fakes.


----------



## FatStrat2 (Apr 7, 2021)

I truly respect those that avoid Chinese guitars. Not because they're bad quality, anyone playing them knows that they've improved greatly in the last few years.

I was going to write a long review about my experience with the Chibson I played today, but I don't think anyone would care. I was also going to test play that second green guitar I posted earlier as well. But playing the one at the pawn shop (not for sale) just reassured what I've been posting here all along and playing the green one would have been redundant IMO (and a waste of gas).

Him and I actually got off to a bit of a jam. We carted the Chibson and a small Marshall SS amp to his backroom where he has a 5 piece set up. It was fun. After about 2 minutes of playing this guitar, I forgot I was playing a Chibson. That alone tells me a lot. Just before I arrived, I had stopped by L&M to re-familiarize myself by playing a couple of Chinese made Epiphone LPs: one acoustically, one plugged into a Fender Mustang amp.

Honestly, they're about the same give or take. The Chibson was way broken in and setup correctly, so it was easier to play than those 2 Epis I played at L&M. The Epis at L&M had almost charcoal strings, why the staff are too lazy to wipe them down is beyond me. The Chibson & Epis both had their pluses & minuses and I would call it a draw give or take (the finish on the Chibson only rates a 6 IMO). Finish might look good below in the pics, but up close it's so-so. The only reason I would choose the Chibson other than cost is because it's setup better, but you can do that to the Epi. The Epi pickups sounded better too, though that's hard to say for sure because an amp and its speaker are huge in tone chasing and there was no way for a fair amplified comparison. Being a pawn shop owner, he was allergic to cameras, but he sent me these 2 pics after I had left.

The Epi nor the Chibson were pieces of crap, anyone but a beginner could see that. I wouldn't want to own either though. So given this limited experiment, I stand by what I posted earlier.










Made in U.S.A. and fake Grovers too.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

sulphur said:


> MIJ Epiphones came with the open book headstock, I owned two of them.
> They were made for the Japanese domestic market, but some made their way over here.
> 
> I believe that they were made along side of the Epiphone Elitists, same factory.
> ...


that's what mine looked like. the elitist thing makes sense, considering that at the time i paid $800 cash for it. i think it was 93-94? i don't know what the equivalent money is today w/o looking it up, but on a guess, i'd bet it's double. i remember clearly the day i bought it. it was the one time i had a knot of cash so big, i could buy literally anything in the entire store. i bought the epi and a 50 watt marshall combo, a strap, some cords, a distortion pedal, picks, and a few sets of strings. i probably played a dozen guitars that day before choosing that epi, including actual gibbys. in my whole life, the only guitar i've owned longer than i owned that one, is the studio pro i bought in 2014. i sold the epi during a layoff, like most of the cool stuff i've had over the years. it felt really good in my hands, and sounded great. i had a buyer for it long before i decided to sell it.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

cheezyridr said:


> that's what mine looked like. the elitist thing makes sense, considering that at the time i paid $800 cash for it. i think it was 93-94? i don't know what the equivalent money is today w/o looking it up, but on a guess, i'd bet it's double. i remember clearly the day i bought it. it was the one time i had a knot of cash so big, i could buy literally anything in the entire store. i bought the epi and a 50 watt marshall combo, a strap, some cords, a distortion pedal, picks, and a few sets of strings. i probably played a dozen guitars that day before choosing that epi, including actual gibbys. in my whole life, the only guitar i've owned longer than i owned that one, is the studio pro i bought in 2014. i sold the epi during a layoff, like most of the cool stuff i've had over the years. it felt really good in my hands, and sounded great. i had a buyer for it long before i decided to sell it.


It's odd that they were being sold new over here in NA.
The window that these were made was later, '98-'02. Maybe there were ealier versions, I'm not sure of that.



http://epiphonewiki.org/index/Epiphone_Japan.php


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

2manyGuitars said:


> My offer to buy it and send it through a wood chipper was completely legit.


So was mine of doing a Townshend vid. lol


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

laristotle said:


> So was mine of doing a Townshend vid. lol


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

Maybe I'm confused, but I don't see an Epiphone or any other Chinese made guitar that is a legitimate brand of it's own as a Chibson.

Fake Gibson off Alibaba or whatever is to me a "Chibson".

Epiphone, ESP, Squier whatever make it is made in China, not a "Chibson" or fake Gibson. And I don't know why the Slash guitar was brought up at all. It was the 80s, china as we know it now was a long way away.


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

The poll question was referring to guitars pretending to be something they're not. An Epiphone made in China is an Epiphone.


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

Brand names manufactured in china have their own QC staff on site.
Chibsons and chenders do not.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

colchar said:


> Generally I agree but again, what about a Partscaster like my Tele? I bought the neck from Fender (via L&M) and Fender sent it to me with a decal on the front and a legit serial number on the back. I did not ask for those, the manufacturer just provided them.
> 
> Mine is a Squier body and Fender neck, so both main parts are made by Fender. Actually all of the parts are made by Fender except for the pickups (Vinehams). I do not pass it off as a Fender, I claim it is a Partscaster because that's what it is.
> 
> Am I in the wrong?


It's a partscaster, not a fake--the neck is a Fender, if it was not a Fender (or licensed by them) then it's a fake neck.
There's no good reason to put Fender on the headstock when it isn't, other than to fool someone or as a joke.
But if it's as a joke--remove it if you sell it.

I conce printed out a Fender logo & taped it tot he headstock of my LP copy--for a joke--btu it wouldn't have fooled anybody--it wa s a piece of paper & some tape--it hasn't been on their in ages
I have another logo--a made up name, that I may put on the headstock permanently one day.
But it doesn't say "Gibson" or "Epiphpone"


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

2manyGuitars said:


> I was looking at a used Gretsch yesterday and that was my first question. It was made in Korea so I’m probably going to go check it out.


Electromatic? I fucking love my MIK Electromatic.


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

laristotle said:


> Brand names manufactured in china have their own QC staff on site.
> Chibsons and chenders do not.


Exactly! Another example is GFS, that sells lots of parts with their own brand name on it and they make sure what they advertise is what you get and that you're happy with it. Or Monoprice, everything is carefully spec'd and QC is pretty high.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

sulphur said:


> It's odd that they were being sold new over here in NA.
> The window that these were made was later, '98-'02. Maybe there were ealier versions, I'm not sure of that.
> 
> 
> ...


it's possible my memory is a little off, but i'm sure it wasn't any later than 95. by 98 i was already back in delaware.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

sulphur said:


> View attachment 377919


----------



## 2manyGuitars (Jul 6, 2009)

colchar said:


> Electromatic? I fucking love my MIK Electromatic.


Yup. Me too.
I have a couple Korean Gretsches.


----------



## tonewoody (Mar 29, 2017)

My opinion is "sell the sketchy shit somewhere else".

Petty bickering and subjective opinion on random samples of grey market goods is meaningless. If you want to fight about it, that says alot about you.
That said, no question, fuck Chibson's, If sketchy and cheap is your thing and you are happy, keep the guitar and STFU. Go play it and enjoy.

I kind of like to think that GC takes the high road and keeps it classy. Not saying I am a great example...😀. No expectations from others either, it's all good.

Essentially, whenever the overqualified experts get a little too worked up, they lose credibility. Really, no worries, Noted.

I never look at budget Gibson's anyway so perhaps my observations are of little value. But hey, my vote counts!

Chib on...


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

you know you want it....
Chibson no long waits! | Guitars | Windsor Region | Kijiji
"Gibson replica. Good pickups, but would need new pots, nut and tuners. Bridge is decent. Want that Les Paul? Want that les paul with a nice bookend headstock and still cost less than an ugly epi even after upgrades. Here is your chance! Slim neck very playable. See if your friends can tell. Regardless it looks beautiful on your wall. Probably has less flaws that real Gibsons these days  Nice green with zebra pups and cream pickguard....you know you want it! 500 OBO"


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

Couldn't be a Chibson being sold as a legit guitar for $500?

Electric guitar | Guitars | Guelph | Kijiji


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

BlueRocker said:


> Couldn't be a Chibson being sold as a legit guitar for $500?


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

laristotle said:


> View attachment 378920


What am I looking at/for Larry? Hard to make this out on my phone.


----------



## 2manyGuitars (Jul 6, 2009)

SWLABR said:


> What am I looking at/for Larry? Hard to make this out on my phone.


It’s fake AF.


----------



## BlueRocker (Jan 5, 2020)

Ad is down now.


----------



## tomee2 (Feb 27, 2017)

laristotle said:


> View attachment 378920


I saw a fake with the correct bridge posts last year, and it had nibs on the fret ends.


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

2manyGuitars said:


> It’s fake AF.


I figured, just couldn’t make out what the picture was eluding to.

“fake AF” sums it up nicely!


----------



## laristotle (Aug 29, 2019)

SWLABR said:


> What am I looking at/for Larry? Hard to make this out on my phone.


Epiphone style bridge screw posts.


----------

