Gibson ( Fakes/Chinese knock offs)

[Bob Savage]

At this point with Gibson, as long as they aren't using the Gibson logo, I don't see the problem. 50-60 year old designs, never trademarked, copyrighted, patented... who cares as long as they aren't infringing on Gibson's name - Les Paul knockoffs have been around forever and no all of the sudden it's a problem?

Steve

No, no man, it's only the cheap ones that are a problem and stuff.

 

[Bob Savage]

I would prefer they not use the Gibson logo but what can you do?

If the guitar is branded as Gibson, then I definitely have a problem with that, but at that point it's not a knock-off, it's a counterfeit. There is a difference.

 

[1meanplexi]

Has anyone played one of these now I will use the word counterfeit's?

 

[aftec]

Gibson is selling a 50-60 year old design for ridiculous prices and trying to keep up their profit margins.
Why did Gibson not argue when Slash helped them selling Les Pauls in tens of thousands with using a replica on AFD?
Does my Tokai sounds better for half price? Yes it is. I sold my Gibson.
Lately I helped to find a good Les Paul for a friend. We tried approx 80. How much were hitting the mark? 2.
Ridiculous. The instruments are mediocre at average for premium price. Bollocks.

Manufacturing/selling counterfeits is a different story. Using the Gibson trademark, is the same as counterfeiting any other brand. It should be tracked down and busted with the full force of the law.

 

[BackCrack]

...Why did Gibson not argue when Slash helped them selling Les Pauls in tens of thousands with using a replica on AFD?...

Slash is far from being the only one that used or is using a replica with Gibson taking advantage of it.

 

[1meanplexi]

Gibson is selling a 50-60 year old design for ridiculous prices and trying to keep up their profit margins.
Why did Gibson not argue when Slash helped them selling Les Pauls in tens of thousands with using a replica on AFD?
Does my Tokai sounds better for half price? Yes it is. I sold my Gibson.
Lately I helped to find a good Les Paul for a friend. We tried approx 80. How much were hitting the mark? 2.
Ridiculous. The instruments are mediocre at average for premium price. Bollocks.

Manufacturing/selling counterfeits is a different story. Using the Gibson trademark, is the same as counterfeiting any other brand. It should be tracked down and busted with the full force of the law.

In reference to your last sentence/statement.....Looks like they got some coming in to the country.

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?sectio ... id=8949202

 

[Shiny_Surface]

Slash is far from being the only one that used or is using a replica with Gibson taking advantage of it.

I'm sure some of those replica's have Gibson logos on them but Gibson looks the other way since it helps them sell instruments.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm on the fence about counterfeits.
I've owned one (pics below) and it looked great and played ok. Setup was terrible, frets needed work and electronics weren't so good, but for 300-350$ shipped, I'd say it's a better value than newer Chinese Ltd Eclipse, which I've also owned and changed electronics in.
I think they are just like DVDs and CDs, if you copy one for personal use, that's fine. But if your intention is reselling for a profit, that's no good. And that's clearly the fake chinese supplier's intention, since they offer the option of buying 10+ guitars at a time; the guitar also comes with fake Gibson warranty and verification list.

Edit: Sorry for the big pictures; also forgot to add that the "Gibsun" came loaded with genuine Epiphone pickups

 

[BackCrack]

Slash is far from being the only one that used or is using a replica with Gibson taking advantage of it.

I'm sure some of those replica's have Gibson logos on them but Gibson looks the other way since it helps them sell instruments.

Absolutely. There's a few U.S. luthiers that are way underground that build extremely high quality replicas for pros and upper-shelf collectors. Gibson doesn't do a damn thing about them because these luthiers keep their mouths shut, don't advertise, and actually encourage their customers to publicly claim the guitars as being real Gibsons. Everybody wins with this: the luthiers make a buck, the customers get the Les Paul they really want, and Gibson cashes in on the free advertising without spending a dime on labor or materials.

And while I'm venting, I frankly don't understand the thinking behind a few "popular" non-U.S. builders. These guys are idiots. They freely advertise with their websites, work bench pictorials, and forum postings. To what end? Their nailing their own coffins shut and they don't know it or just don't care.

 

[bravedude2]

why do esp and ibanez from japan not comsidered cheap knock off of fenders?

 

[voodooradio1]

The only "fakes" that get my blood boiling are the ones that use the actual manufacturer's logo and model name on them. That is counterfeiting, pure and simple. It's a rip-off and can deceive/swindle a potential purchaser.

"Replicas" of a guitar that have the actual luthier's name and/or logo don't get me as rattled, because they are not masquerading to be something they are not.

I guess that means: I'm against the Chinese counterfeit guitars, and have less disdain for something like a Yaron, as it has Yaron's name on it - not Gibson's. I'm sure Gibson's position is quite different than mine, however.

Neither of the two Gil Yaron LP's that have been shown on this site in the last week have Gil Yaron's name on the headstock. They both say Gibson, so yeah, I imagine Gibson would take issue with that as well.

 

[rlord1974]

The only "fakes" that get my blood boiling are the ones that use the actual manufacturer's logo and model name on them. That is counterfeiting, pure and simple. It's a rip-off and can deceive/swindle a potential purchaser.

"Replicas" of a guitar that have the actual luthier's name and/or logo don't get me as rattled, because they are not masquerading to be something they are not.

I guess that means: I'm against the Chinese counterfeit guitars, and have less disdain for something like a Yaron, as it has Yaron's name on it - not Gibson's. I'm sure Gibson's position is quite different than mine, however.

Neither of the two Gil Yaron LP's that have been shown on this site in the last week have Gil Yaron's name on the headstock. They both say Gibson, so yeah, I imagine Gibson would take issue with that as well.

Links please. I could have sworn they said "Gilyaron" in the Gibson script font....

 

[Heritage Softail]

They did say Gilyaron in Gibson font.

The intent was to look like it, so they are infringing. The idea is to be confused at a glance. That meets the intent.

 

[voodooradio1]

The only "fakes" that get my blood boiling are the ones that use the actual manufacturer's logo and model name on them. That is counterfeiting, pure and simple. It's a rip-off and can deceive/swindle a potential purchaser.

"Replicas" of a guitar that have the actual luthier's name and/or logo don't get me as rattled, because they are not masquerading to be something they are not.

I guess that means: I'm against the Chinese counterfeit guitars, and have less disdain for something like a Yaron, as it has Yaron's name on it - not Gibson's. I'm sure Gibson's position is quite different than mine, however.

Neither of the two Gil Yaron LP's that have been shown on this site in the last week have Gil Yaron's name on the headstock. They both say Gibson, so yeah, I imagine Gibson would take issue with that as well.

Links please. I could have sworn they said "Gilyaron" in the Gibson script font....

I am speaking about two separate guitars, each with the logo covered in all of the pics I have seen. You've seen them as well. Maybe there are pics I haven't seen? The only thing I have seen so far are covered logos, with some fairly lame excuses for why they are covered.
From all accounts they are suburb recreations of the originals and I certainly don't fault anyone for wanting to own one, regardless of the name on the headstock.
It was a mistake to say what I said with certainty. I'll just say that I find the fact that both logos are covered highly suspect when coupled with all of the "nod,nod, wink, wink" shit going on in that thread, and that in my opinion, they feature a Gibson logo. That would be the only good reason I could think of to hide them.

 

[Kelly]

But...that guitar was never for sale, just made for him.

Um, GNR's manager bought that guitar and gave it to Slash. Slash was broke and unknown at the time; no way someone would make a high end Les Paul copy and just give it to him.

 

[chumbucket]

Edit:also forgot to add that the "Gibsun" came loaded with genuine Epiphone pickups

Nope, those "Epiphone" pickups are Chinese knockoffs too.

 

[Anonymous]

Edit:also forgot to add that the "Gibsun" came loaded with genuine Epiphone pickups

Nope, those "Epiphone" pickups are Chinese knockoffs too.

I don't think so, they had "Epiphone" logo engraved on the back
Why would they copy the whole Gibson guitar, then put fake Epi pickups instead of fake Gibson ones? Doesn't make any sense

 

[mesa50w]

a fake is a fake is a fake .....

 

[1meanplexi]

But...that guitar was never for sale, just made for him.

Um, GNR's manager bought that guitar and gave it to Slash. Slash was broke and unknown at the time; no way someone would make a high end Les Paul copy and just give it to him.

That is correct.....see this link http://www.slashsworld.com/equipment/gu ... is-derrig/ what is the guitar referred as in the first paragraph? Doesn't matter how he got the thing. What does the headstock say in the pics?

 

[Kelly]

But...that guitar was never for sale, just made for him.

Um, GNR's manager bought that guitar and gave it to Slash. Slash was broke and unknown at the time; no way someone would make a high end Les Paul copy and just give it to him.

That is correct.....see this link http://www.slashsworld.com/equipment/gu ... is-derrig/ what is the guitar referred as in the first paragraph? Doesn't matter how he got the thing. What does the headstock say in the pics?

Says "Gibson". You better report him.