# Is it still wrong if its admittedly a fake?



## Destropiate (Jan 17, 2007)

http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-...s-Korean-Gibson-L-5-Custom-W0QQAdIdZ280888543

Just curious to see what you guys think of this. The seller makes no bones about this guitar being a knockoff, I'm not sure if its worth the asking price and he does talk it up a bit, he definately isn't trying to get genuine Gibson prices though. Is this ok ethically to sell since its not being presented as a real Gibby....or does it still rub you the wrong way cause it has the potential to be turned around and sold as the real thing somewhere down the line?


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

I would say both. At least they are making it clear that it is a fake. Which is kind of refreshing in a sense. I just wish there were none of them out there at all. Make life a lot easier


----------



## bobb (Jan 4, 2007)

I didn't see where he admits that it's a fake. He is attempting to sell a Chinese counterfeit as a Korean Gibson. I don't recall Gibsons ever being made in Korea. The serial number places it as a Nashville guitar made on Aug 14, 2000. Wouldn't this guitar if it was a real Gibson have been made in Memphis? Also note that the seller has used pics of two totally different headstocks. Another red flag is the price. These sell for less than $400 on those Chinese counterfeit sites. This tells me that it was bought with the intention of flipping it for a profit.

Stay very far away from this one.


----------



## jimihendrix (Jun 27, 2009)

Like "bobb" says...there is no mention by the seller that it is a fake...which I believe it is...Korean Gibson pffft...sounds like the seller is leading on any potential buyers into believing the guitar is authentic...

They re-iterate it's "genuine" pedigree by mentioning that it has Gibson Metal Tulip Tuners...and Gibson 57 Classic Bass & Treble Humbucker Pickups...

Writing..."She's 100% like original. If she came with papers she would be worth $8,700 easy!"...is kind of ambiguous...and can be read a couple of ways...one of which could get them out of legal hot water...


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

jimihendrix said:


> Like "bobb" says...there is no mention by the seller that it is a fake...which I believe it is...Korean Gibson pffft...sounds like the seller is leading on any potential buyers into believing the guitar is authentic...
> 
> They re-iterate it's "genuine" pedigree by mentioning that it has Gibson Metal Tulip Tuners...and Gibson 57 Classic Bass & Treble Humbucker Pickups...
> 
> Writing..."She's 100% like original. If she came with papers she would be worth $8,700 easy!"...is kind of ambiguous...and can be read a couple of ways...one of which could get them out of legal hot water...


I guess you guys are right. I just assumed that anyone looking at it already knew that there are no authentic Gibsons made in Korea. But then again, we must assume that there would be buyers out there that would think there are based on the ad.


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

What is the difference between that, and....

The aftermarket necks i see for sale here that arent fenders, but have a fender decal applied?
The non gibson guitars (clones or otherwise) that someone has but a gibson name on, or like what is for sale currently has replaced the entire face of a non gibson with that from a gibson lp and is openly stating so?

I dont really see any difference... But no one seems to care otherwise, unless it is a chinese fake.


----------



## shoretyus (Jan 6, 2007)

It bothered somebody from Stirling 

http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-...-guitars-Please-Be-Advised-W0QQAdIdZ280907430


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

it is illegal to sell counterfeits, therefore it is wrong. regardless if they say its real or not.

he says this is made in korea...the headstock says MADE IN USA

his ad says metal tulips. one photo shows green tulips the rest show gold kidneys.

the way i am reading his ad, he does not say it's fake, but a real gibson that was made in korea.

i bet he bought the guitar for cheap...realized it was fake and wants to make a profit, or he bought it for cheap knowing it was fake and wants to make a profit.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Destropiate said:


> http://toronto.kijiji.ca/c-buy-and-...s-Korean-Gibson-L-5-Custom-W0QQAdIdZ280888543
> 
> Just curious to see what you guys think of this. The seller makes no bones about this guitar being a knockoff, I'm not sure if its worth the asking price and he does talk it up a bit, he definately isn't trying to get genuine Gibson prices though. Is this ok ethically to sell since its not being presented as a real Gibby....or does it still rub you the wrong way cause it has the potential to be turned around and sold as the real thing somewhere down the line?


I would perhaps buy a fake Gibson but I don't think I would ever buy a real one. I simply don't like them. The necks are too narrow for me and price wise I think they are the biggest rip off guitar manufacturer there is. While they do have quality, they charge a lot more than others for the same thing.


----------



## puckhead (Sep 8, 2008)

the line in the sand for me is: If it has a Gibson name on it, and it's not a Gibson.... that's a problem.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

blam said:


> it is illegal to sell counterfeits, therefore it is wrong. regardless if they say its real or not.


That's the bottom line here.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

About the only way a seller can not have one of these flagged on Kijiji is by not showing the headstock at all in the photos, and clearly stating that it's a knockoff and to contact them for more information. Even then it still technically violates Kijiji rules because they don't allow counterfeit stuff on there. It's one of the options available for flagging ads. One of the few rules they have. I have seen ads for the Chinese knockoffs that aren't misleading in any way still get flagged and removed on there.

As for my personal feelings, if it's clearly stated that it's a knockoff, I wouldn't flag it. I never saw this ad, but people say it was misleading, and in that case I would flag it.


----------



## BEACHBUM (Sep 21, 2010)

Yes, it is definitely unethical. On the other hand so are Henry and Gibson so I'm really having a hard time caring any more. When Gibson stops selling shabby workmanship at high prices simply because they have the name I guess I'll start worrying about ethics again.


----------



## BEACHBUM (Sep 21, 2010)

Thought I ought to qualify my above statement. I think that it's no secret that Gibsons quality has and still is slipping into an apparently bottomless pit. Their CEO has taken the company from one of the most revered product names in musical instrument history to the point that their long time loyal customers are questioning if the company will ever get its act together and their own employees have voted Gibson as the worst company to work for in the entire country (see link below). The bottom line is that Henry has made an intentional marketing decision to put as little into producing quality instruments as he can while selling them at off the chart prices on name alone.

Worrying about "ethical protection" for corporations like Gibson is akin to worrying how Bernie Madoff is being treated by the Department of Correction. I'm sure they are both being treated far better than they deserve. 

http://www.glassdoor.com/blog/glass...rounded-gibson-guitar-strikes-cord-employees/


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I wouldn't buy or in any way support a company that puts a fake logo or name on the headstock. It's not a matter of whether I know it's a fake or not. I object to the very existance of bogus products like these.

I'm the first guy to say that Gibsons are overpriced and that you can get the same quality for much less money from lesser known makers, but when it comes to this stuff, I'm firmly on Gibson's side.


----------



## Alex Csank (Jul 22, 2010)

Milkman said:


> I wouldn't buy or in any way support a company that puts a fake logo or name on the headstock. It's not a matter of whether I know it's a fake or not. I object to the very existance of bogus products like these.
> 
> I'm the first guy to say that Gibsons are overpriced and that you can get the same quality for much less money from lesser known makers, but when it comes to this stuff, I'm firmly on Gibson's side.


Eggggggggzacketeckedley there Milkboy!


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

BEACHBUM said:


> Yes, it is definitely unethical. On the other hand so are Henry and Gibson so I'm really having a hard time caring any more. When Gibson stops selling shabby workmanship at high prices simply because they have the name I guess I'll start worrying about ethics again.


But if all of their stuff was so bad, wouldn't they have destroyed their hard-earned reputation by now? I've heard people for 30 years now complain about how Gibsons are bad, poorly made, over-priced, etc. And yet, their rep hasn't seemed to suffer from it - after 30 years. In fact, many used ads I see claim "plays as good as a Gibson", "better than a Gibson", etc. It is still one of the reference standards.

It only took GM 20 years to trash their reputation with horrible, badge-engineered crap. And they are still paying for it - and will for years to come. What is it that Gibson (and presumably Fender) are doing to stop this from happening.

Personally, I've played a few bad Gibsons (IMO). And bad PRS's. And bad Ibanezes, Martins, etc. But I've played some pretty good models from each of these companies, too. Saying all Gibson stuff is bad, of poor quality, etc. can't be supported IMO.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Steadfastly said:


> I would perhaps buy a fake Gibson but I don't think I would ever buy a real one. I simply don't like them. The necks are too narrow for me and price wise I think they are the biggest rip off guitar manufacturer there is. While they do have quality, they charge a lot more than others for the same thing.


I maybe thought the same thing as you. I've been a life long Fender player that recently bought an LP traditional. It has the 50's neck that is big and chunky like my Crook and my CS Nocaster. And for $2,200 the quality far surpasses that of my over $3,000 Nocaster and even my $3,000 Crook. Now I'm still just an occasional Gibson user as my Crook (Tele style) is still my main player. But I now happen to think Gibsons are an excellent value.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

High/Deaf said:


> But if all of their stuff was so bad, wouldn't they have destroyed their hard-earned reputation by now? I've heard people for 30 years now complain about how Gibsons are bad, poorly made, over-priced, etc. And yet, their rep hasn't seemed to suffer from it - after 30 years. In fact, many used ads I see claim "plays as good as a Gibson", "better than a Gibson", etc. It is still one of the reference standards.
> 
> It only took GM 20 years to trash their reputation with horrible, badge-engineered crap. And they are still paying for it - and will for years to come. What is it that Gibson (and presumably Fender) are doing to stop this from happening.
> 
> Personally, I've played a few bad Gibsons (IMO). And bad PRS's. And bad Ibanezes, Martins, etc. But I've played some pretty good models from each of these companies, too. Saying all Gibson stuff is bad, of poor quality, etc. can't be supported IMO.


Its mostly the Putz's on the Internet that spread this stupid diatribe. Seems quality of many things was much better before the Internet explosion where people love the platform of complaining about things that most likely stem from their own inadequacies. I've bought many guitars in the past 30 years and it usually came down to more of a case that some I liked and some I didn't. But very, very few were actually bad guitars. Its more a preference.I agree if there were that many dogs out there for Fender and Gibson and people had to go through 20 30 guitars of the same make just to find a good one then the companies probably wouldn't last.
When I bought my LP trad, I played 3 different ones, a couple of studios and about 3 standards. They were all fine guitars and were pretty consistent, quality wise. In the end it was a traditional for me and I chose the one with the finish I liked.
A good guitar player can make a piece of crap guitar sound good. So if you find your self going through a lot of guitars trying to find that good one maybe you need to practice more.


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

I find it somewhat odd not one comment about my post. Why is it, that if someone is selling a "cheap chinese fake" everyone is up in arms... But if someone has a fake les paul, or an aftermarket fender partsocaster they slapped a decal on, in order to convince others it is a genuine fender, it is somehow seem as ok?

I am not trying to cause trouble, but for some reason, if i bought any other brand of guitar, decided to rebadge the headstock with a gibson one, and try and sell it that is every bit as bad is it not?

Just curious... As i see quite often, people selling especially les pauls, and more commonly strats that are not fender or gibson yet sport those names. And no one cares?

Ajc


----------



## Alex Csank (Jul 22, 2010)

ajcoholic said:


> I find it somewhat odd not one comment about my post. Why is it, that if someone is selling a "cheap chinese fake" everyone is up in arms... But if someone has a fake les paul, or an aftermarket fender partsocaster they slapped a decal on, in order to convince others it is a genuine fender, it is somehow seem as ok?
> 
> I am not trying to cause trouble, but for some reason, if i bought any other brand of guitar, decided to rebadge the headstock with a gibson one, and try and sell it that is every bit as bad is it not?
> 
> ...


AJ - whether someone is trying to sell a "cheap chinese fake" which is pretty much designed specifically to fool the non-expert buyer, whether that be a fake Rolex watch, a fake LaCoste shirt, a fake designer handbag, shoes, perfume, Les Paul, White Falcon or whatever... it is truly a boot-legged theft of brand identity. It doesn't matter whether that cheap copy is made in China, Korea, Indonesia, or Indiana... it's a cheap fake. However, there is a difference between these and an aftermarket Fender Partscaster which has had a headstock decal slapped-on by some home builder in North America. The issue with 'Partscaster' Fenders is that most of these are put together at home workshops by amateurs using anywhere from 0% to 100% genuine Fender parts, and by and large, these folks do not slap a Fender decal on them unless they are pretty much made up of only genuine Fender - or Fender licensed - parts. I think most folks know that there's a lot of that kind of guitar around, that real Fender Strats, Telecasters and other models are (or have been) made in the USA, Mexico and Japan, and that the prices vary widely based upon year of manufacture, serial number, etc. So the buyers will tend to be careful when slapping down their money for what is claimed to be an expensive or vintage model. With the Lester, I think most folks also know the difference between the authorized Epiphone Les Pauls, the real Gibson versions and the vast number of copies (with non-Gibson logos on their headstock). 

I don't think that there are many people who think that it's OK to try and pass ANY 'fake' off as the real McCoy.... whether it's a Fender, Gretsch, Gibson or any other brand. 

Personally, I have an issue with individuals who try and sell 're-issued' guitars from companies like Gibson, Fender, Gretsch, Rickenbacker or newer copies of vintage guitars by Eastwood and other re-born companies like Danelectro, Burns, Hofner, etc. as 'Vintage Originals'.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> I maybe thought the same thing as you. I've been a life long Fender player that recently bought an LP traditional. It has the 50's neck that is big and chunky like my Crook and my CS Nocaster. And for $2,200 the quality far surpasses that of my over $3,000 Nocaster and even my $3,000 Crook. Now I'm still just an occasional Gibson user as my Crook (Tele style) is still my main player. But I now happen to think Gibsons are an excellent value.


Your perception of value comes from the perspective of someone who has no problem dropping $3000 on a guitar though. I don't have $3000 on a guitar, and more to the point have never picked up a guitar I consider to be worth that price. I haven't played a guitar that I thought was worth $2000 more than the guitars I currently owned. That is just my perspective though. I am not saying there is anything wrong with your buying habits, only that you idea of 'value' is obviously going to be completely different from a lot of other people.

I think the issue is that people feel every aspect of a $3000 guitar should be put under a microscope quality control wise. And I personally agree with that. While their are lemons in every line, the quality and general quality control among Schecter, Ibanez, and Reverend guitars for example is pretty incredible for the price range. If they can reach that level with their guitars costing $700-1000, then a company charging 3 times that for guitars should exceed that level of quality control in my opinion. I have seen Q.C. issues on Gibsons that are inexcusable for guitars in that price range.


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

Alex Csank said:


> AJ - whether someone is trying to sell a "cheap chinese fake" which is pretty much designed specifically to fool the non-expert buyer, whether that be a fake Rolex watch, a fake LaCoste shirt, a fake designer handbag, shoes, perfume, Les Paul, White Falcon or whatever... it is truly a boot-legged theft of brand identity. It doesn't matter whether that cheap copy is made in China, Korea, Indonesia, or Indiana... it's a cheap fake. However, there is a difference between these and an aftermarket Fender Partscaster which has had a headstock decal slapped-on by some home builder in North America. The issue with 'Partscaster' Fenders is that most of these are put together at home workshops by amateurs using anywhere from 0% to 100% genuine Fender parts, and by and large, these folks do not slap a Fender decal on them unless they are pretty much made up of only genuine Fender - or Fender licensed - parts. I think most folks know that there's a lot of that kind of guitar around, that real Fender Strats, Telecasters and other models are (or have been) made in the USA, Mexico and Japan, and that the prices vary widely based upon year of manufacture, serial number, etc. So the buyers will tend to be careful when slapping down their money for what is claimed to be an expensive or vintage model. With the Lester, I think most folks also know the difference between the authorized Epiphone Les Pauls, the real Gibson versions and the vast number of copies (with non-Gibson logos on their headstock).
> 
> I don't think that there are many people who think that it's OK to try and pass ANY 'fake' off as the real McCoy.... whether it's a Fender, Gretsch, Gibson or any other brand.
> 
> Personally, I have an issue with individuals who try and sell 're-issued' guitars from companies like Gibson, Fender, Gretsch, Rickenbacker or newer copies of vintage guitars by Eastwood and other re-born companies like Danelectro, Burns, Hofner, etc. as 'Vintage Originals'.


This is where I see a HUGE ethical problem. I can make a pretty decent guitar. But, if I make a strat or LP clone, and then put Gibson or Fender on it, I am still producing a FAKE. It is a guitar, not made by the respective company, designed to make someone (it to me is not relevant if the buyer is educated enough or not to tell) think it is real.

What gets me is, a Warmoth neck with a Fender decal on it, still is not a Fender product, any more than an Edwards guitar with a Gibson LP facing on the headstock is a real LP. So why can guys sell these items without issues but post a guitar MIC and you are now a criminal, or at least unethical?

I dont understand how so many can think this way. To me, a fake is a fake.

AJC


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

ajcoholic said:


> This is where I see a HUGE ethical problem. I can make a pretty decent guitar. But, if I make a strat or LP clone, and then put Gibson or Fender on it, I am still producing a FAKE. It is a guitar, not made by the respective company, designed to make someone (it to me is not relevant if the buyer is educated enough or not to tell) think it is real.
> 
> What gets me is, a Warmoth neck with a Fender decal on it, still is not a Fender product, any more than an Edwards guitar with a Gibson LP facing on the headstock is a real LP. So why can guys sell these items without issues but post a guitar MIC and you are now a criminal, or at least unethical?
> 
> ...


My only take on this is that it's very rare I see a partscaster for sale with a Fender decal on it. I am not saying it doesn't happen, it's just that browsing my local Kijiji's or Craigslist most of the partscaster have no Fender logos, and are accurately represented as partscatsers. I see way more Chinese counterfeit Gibson's popup than I do partscasters with Fender decals. So I see them as more of a problem. 

I don't disagree that both are fakes though. I have no idea why people put Fender decals on non-Fender guitars and would never consider it myself.


----------



## GUInessTARS (Dec 28, 2007)

Fascinating discussion with many facets! The point brought to my mind is that when Leo Fender started a new company, and began making three pickup, double cut guitars with a whammy, he didn't call them Fenders. Nor did Wayne Charvel, or Dean Zelinsky. But, unless I am mistaken, Slash's first Les Paul wasn't a Gibson, even though it was labelled as such. I don't recall Gibson making a big issue of this.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

torndownunit said:


> Your perception of value comes from the perspective of someone who has no problem dropping $3000 on a guitar though. I don't have $3000 on a guitar, and more to the point have never picked up a guitar I consider to be worth that price. I haven't played a guitar that I thought was worth $2000 more than the guitars I currently owned. That is just my perspective though. I am not saying there is anything wrong with your buying habits, only that you idea of 'value' is obviously going to be completely different from a lot of other people.
> 
> I think the issue is that people feel every aspect of a $3000 guitar should be put under a microscope quality control wise. And I personally agree with that. While their are lemons in every line, the quality and general quality control among Schecter, Ibanez, and Reverend guitars for example is pretty incredible for the price range. If they can reach that level with their guitars costing $700-1000, then a company charging 3 times that for guitars should exceed that level of quality control in my opinion. I have seen Q.C. issues on Gibsons that are inexcusable for guitars in that price range.


I agree that there are value in guitars ranging in the $700-$1,000 and even less. If my only criteria were the best value for the lowest dollar that's what I would have. But I had very specific requirements in what I wanted and that's what they cost, So it was worth it to me. And there are many, many more people out there that its worth it to. You can't really say across the board that there are no guitars worth that much money. Only to you. When it comes to hobbies, guitars are the center of my world so I have a lot invested in it. I have a friend who is in to motorcycles and has incredible amounts of money invested in me. If I were to get another bike it would not be a Harley as the value isn't worth it to me.


----------



## blam (Feb 18, 2011)

GUInessTARS said:


> But, unless I am mistaken, Slash's first Les Paul wasn't a Gibson, even though it was labelled as such. I don't recall Gibson making a big issue of this.


that's because they cashed in on it...and 20?30? years later, they still are cashing in on it....if Derrig/Max were advertising them for sale Gibson would be all over that.

and in the case of these guitars, they were top notch in the quality department. i don't think we can say the same about these China made gibsons.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

I am only stating an opinion. And I am only stating it because it relates to the Gibson and perceived value point that you mentioned, and why people hold Gibson to a higher standard. I didn't make a blanket statement that they aren't worth the price to everyone in any way. Only that the high expectations people have of the product are completely warranted. They SHOULD he held to the highest standard. And people who aren't happy with the quality should be able to state it in forums.


----------



## Alex Csank (Jul 22, 2010)

ajcoholic said:


> This is where I see a HUGE ethical problem. I can make a pretty decent guitar. But, if I make a strat or LP clone, and then put Gibson or Fender on it, I am still producing a FAKE. It is a guitar, not made by the respective company, designed to make someone (it to me is not relevant if the buyer is educated enough or not to tell) think it is real.
> 
> What gets me is, a Warmoth neck with a Fender decal on it, still is not a Fender product, any more than an Edwards guitar with a Gibson LP facing on the headstock is a real LP. So why can guys sell these items without issues but post a guitar MIC and you are now a criminal, or at least unethical?
> 
> ...


AJ, I don't understand. Do you really believe that there are a LOT of people in North America who home-build fake Gibsons and Fenders and try to pass them off as genuine items? And if so, you also believe that many people have no problem with that? I disagree. I have a very BIG problem with anybody trying to sell an artificially labeled guitar of any kind as the real thing if it isn't... and I believe that almost everyone would agree with that.

But... for all the small-time 'fake' makers out there (not that I believe there are too many of these), to me it is still (somewhat) worse for a factory to 'mass produce' fakes, if for no other reason than that they are the ones who have the potential to actually 'fool' MANY buyers.


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

i once seen a fake but custom made Gibson at the GEAR FORUM, forsale, it was probably made better then the real deal, had the Gibson name on it. I made the mistake in asking , if a person could really do that, and i thought i was going too get hung, not by the seller but by all the other people that seen my question.. the moderator sent me a private email, tell me too more or less, too cool it , thats a question u dont ask and he deleted my posts.. soooooo they protect there own over there.. and the moderator should no better then too allow a post of a fake Gibson, They didnt band me there, when i went back they deleted the picture that showed the Gibson headstock . This guitar was not a china knock-off it was as real as you could get with a very high price..The seller was also up-front about it not being real.i believe the guitar was made in Toronto, but not sure.


----------



## Alex Csank (Jul 22, 2010)

SERIOUSLY?!?!?!?! They did that at the GEAR FORUM? That smacks of 'UGLY'!!! Has anyone else ever had that kind of experience on a forum? Folks actually protecting 'fakes'?!?!?! Man, that sucks big floppy donkey dinks!!!!


----------



## Rick31797 (Apr 20, 2007)

ITs very true... i find the gear forum a weird place.. go there once and awhile but cant seem too fit in..it reminds me of my public school days where there is a group of guys that would rather bully the new guy then welcome him.


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

Alex Csank said:


> AJ, I don't understand. Do you really believe that there are a LOT of people in North America who home-build fake Gibsons and Fenders and try to pass them off as genuine items? And if so, you also believe that many people have no problem with that? I disagree. I have a very BIG problem with anybody trying to sell an artificially labeled guitar of any kind as the real thing if it isn't... and I believe that almost everyone would agree with that.
> 
> But... for all the small-time 'fake' makers out there (not that I believe there are too many of these), to me it is still (somewhat) worse for a factory to 'mass produce' fakes, if for no other reason than that they are the ones who have the potential to actually 'fool' MANY buyers.


Sure, i see regularly non fender made necks and parts o casters where peole admit as such, but the headstock says fender. Look at the guys selling fender decals.. There has to be a ton of fakes out there. This is my point exactly.. This is somehow fine to most, but i dont get why that is perceived as ok?


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

ajcoholic said:


> Sure, i see regularly non fender made necks and parts o casters where peole admit as such, but the headstock says fender. Look at the guys selling fender decals.. There has to be a ton of fakes out there. This is my point exactly.. This is somehow fine to most, but i dont get why that is perceived as ok?


I don't think it is, and I don't understand it. I definitely don't understand someone building a guitar, and putting another companies logo on it. Outside of internet forums that specialize in Fenders though, I rarely see partscasters with Fender decals for sale. And even there I don't see a ton of them. The builder usually has their own name on it. Again, to me the counterfeit Gibson's are more of an issue simply because I see more of them for sale. But one counterfeit is definitely not more 'ok' then the other.


----------



## GUInessTARS (Dec 28, 2007)

For me, the difference is in the _intention_ of the creator/seller. I own a Nash strat, a G&L tele and a Heritage Les Paul so I obviously don't care about the headstock logo. To me these instruments are copies of the originals, but not made to fool anyone into thinking they are the originals. They are made to be the best quality instruments the maker could produce, and hopefully sell. The intention of fake instruments it seems is not to produce a quality instrument but to create a product that rides on the perceived value of the original. The fake could be a DVD, a purse or the parts for your car. They are made as cheaply as possible, without regard to quality or durability, in factories that treat their employees with the same contempt they treat their consumers. They are made to look as much like the originals as possible, without the expensive R&D that the originals have to evolve from. Buying a fake, used or new, entices the factory into making another. They aren't in it to make you a great guitar, they are in it to make a dollar. They may accidentally make a good guitar, or brake parts that actually stop your car, but they don't care if they don't.


----------



## jimihendrix (Jun 27, 2009)

Rick31797 said:


> i once seen a fake but custom made Gibson at the GEAR FORUM, forsale, it was probably made better then the real deal, had the Gibson name on it. I made the mistake in asking , if a person could really do that, and i thought i was going too get hung, not by the seller but by all the other people that seen my question.. the moderator sent me a private email, tell me too more or less, too cool it , thats a question u dont ask and he deleted my posts.. soooooo they protect there own over there.. and the moderator should no better then too allow a post of a fake Gibson, They didnt band me there, when i went back they deleted the picture that showed the Gibson headstock . This guitar was not a china knock-off it was as real as you could get with a very high price..The seller was also up-front about it not being real.i believe the guitar was made in Toronto, but not sure.


The guitar was probably a highly revered "Clinic" Les Paul...

"Guitar Clinic was a small repair shop in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. They had a few bursts in for repairs and spec'd them out..even x-rayed them. They made 27 copies in the early 90's. with correct woods and shapes.70 year old Honduran Mahogany , old growth BRW, Eastern Maple. Then got the letter from Gibson to stop. The shop closed."

http://www.mylespaul.com/forums/other-les-pauls/2947-my-guitar-clinic-59-replica.html


----------

