fretmeister

There is a victim. FMIC. Their intellectual property has been taken.

As actually proven above the item is illegal and buyer and seller being happy is irrelevant. Of course a happy buyer won’t sue (civil action) the seller... but if TD confiscate the item and burn it, then buyer will sue if seller won’t refund. Won’t be happy then. As for there not being an issue if they are happy... I refer you to my first post in the thread. Your opinion on the law does not change the validity or applicability of the law. You not liking the law does not change the illegal nature of the action. The action is still an offence whether you should think it should be or not. The law, the courts, the judges, the Trading Standards etc interpretation of the law is entirely unaffected by your opinion of that law. in a nutshell. It is illegal. Your view doesn’t matter. If you want to change the law lobby your MP. Until that time the law should be upheld.

How did the weight turn up? id love one of his jazz types for my poor old back!

Duped is irrelevant. The item is illegal. It is clearly laid out in the link I posted. here it is again. Just to save you time look8ing for it. i say the law should be upheld. Why don’t you?

So you are arguing an action isn’t illegal because they are not in trouble? pinching a kitkat is still theft even if you get away with it! No no it’s not heroin. It’s copyright and trademark offences. Still against the law. Still illegal. less important than heroin? Maybe. Depends on priorities. That’s the old jurisprudence argument - what is worse? Murder or tax evasion? Murder affects a small group of people intensely. Tax evasion affects everybody a little bit. Plenty of research on that. the fact that you like to move goalposts and claim the offence is not important to you does not mean the action is now lawful. It isn’t. the fact that I don’t care if Mr Blogs in Swansea won’t wear a crash helmet does not mean my indifference makes his offence suddenly legal.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and going lalalalala does not change the fact that clear details / disclaimers about the product DOES NOT change the illegal nature of the product. ”I am being honest about the heroin I’m selling” Plenty of honesty there. The product is still illegal. That’s really how simple it is. It’s just that the penalties for breaking the law are somewhat different. the scale of the crime, whether a single bass or a factory full does not change the offence, it only changes the aggravating factors for sentencing. Stealing a kitkat gets you a caution. Stealing a cargo unit full gets you prison. Both are still theft. Punching someone once gets you community service. Punching them 10 Times gets you prison. Both still assault.

Yes. But if you read the law itself you’d see that the disclaimer use does not render an illegal item legal Consider the reverse. If Bill buys a bass he thinks is a genuine Fender and sells it on... all good. If Pete buys it and discovers the bass was not a Fender then Bill has to refund Pete... even if Trading Standards get involved and confiscate and destroy the bass. Bill has to go back to where he bought it from. Selling with criminal intent to deceive leads to criminal liability to the seller. Selling without does not BUT the item remains illegal and can be confiscated and destroyed. Each person in the chain gets their money back from the last. Caveat Emptor is massively reduced in counterfeit cases as the item is illegal.

Read the post immediately above.

Jimothey here you go, just 1 example “it is illegal to apply someone’s trademark... etc etc” And ”the law applying to disclaimers...does not apply to trade mark and copyright legislation. In essence COUNTERFEIT items cannot legitimately be sold” its up to the indiviuals whether to follow the law or not. But they don’t get to moan if they get prosecuted.

Rubbish. you can look all my info up on the various Trading Standards websites.

The Limelight (or indeed any non Fender with a Fender logo bass) is a deliberate sale of a counterfeit item. Disclaimers don’t make an illegal item legal. No one is suggesting the seller of the bass in the classifieds is telling porkies. He is being honest. The problem is that he is being honest about a counterfeit item! If that doesn’t show exactly why the law is as it is - that the next owner might not be honest- then I don’t know what does.

No. Its actually the fault of Limelight for putting the logo on in the first place when limelight knew they didn’t have permission to do so. Intent to deceive does not matter. See my post re disclaimers not changing the illegal nature of the product.

Fender's official position is that if a person buys 100% of parts directly from Fender and assembles it themselves then it is still NOT a Fender as it has not been assembled and quality checked by a Fender employee or otherwise authorised person. It is NOT a "Fender guitar" it is a "guitar assembled from 100% genuine Fender parts" I love these discussions - full of "what about...?" and "I don't agree with it..." and "The law is an donkey..." type posts. So what? The law is the law and it applies to all. 1: Making your own instrument with a Fender logo is legal. 2: Selling an instrument with a logo on it that shouldn't be there is ILLEGAL 3: DISCLAIMERS / EXPLANATIONS / DECLARATIONS of "it's not real thus I'm not passing off..." DO NOT MATTER and do NOT make the an illegal item legal again. The law is VERY specific. You might be honest but the next person might not be. It's far easier to remove the half-hearted "limelight" sharpie note from the back of the headstock than take it off the front. Your personal honesty about an illegal item is irrelevant. It is the item itself that is illegal. 4: All items with a logo that shouldn't be there (guitars / toasters / pants / handbags etc) become counterfeit the instant there is an attempt to sell. At that point they items can be confiscated and destroyed and the person selling can be prosecuted by Trading Standards and can be sued by the owners of the intellectual property. 5: Individuals who've made a single counterfeit don't usually get in trouble as the trading standards budget is too small. 6: If you have a business based on selling counterfeits - like Limelight - then there is a risk of prison time. Wasn't long ago when a handbag selling lady - selling with disclaimers - got sent to prison for just that. 7: the fact that Fender haven't taken action against any counterfeiters does not mean they approve or even tolerate it - again it comes down to their priorities. 8: "There is no way I'd be able to have one otherwise..." is not a defence. You still haven't got one. You've got a fake. All you've done is helped the counterfeiter stay in business. Several other forums have banned counterfeits from being sold at all. I approve of that. I wish it was the case here too. It doesn't matter if someone doesn't agree with the law. It applies. If you want the law changed then lobby your MP. Until that time, selling a wrongly logo'd item is illegal and represents theft of intellectual property owned by others. Fender own their logos and get to decide how they are used. They might well want to allow a stinky poo factory in the derrière end of nowhere to use them - it's their choice. They might decide that only US instruments can use them for a future run. Again that is their choice. And once again, if you disagree, that does not matter 1 little bit. The law applies. Now, if you want a jurisprudence debate on the nature of counterfeit items then that is different. There's an awful lot of research out there on the impact to employment / income etc and even personal losses and injuries caused by counterfeit products like any item with heating elements not made properly. All products are treated the same. It's very easy to get into a "it's only a guitar" mindset and not think about the fake toaster burning a house down.

If it’s worth doing, it’s worth overdoing. thats why I love Doug, and Billy, Les, Stu, etc..

Wasn't it the original bassist in Saxon who said open notes were vital to rock music... If there were no open notes he couldn't point while he was playing!!

Ease of playing is all. I don't care beyond that. Also my favourite bass (for today anyway) has a zero fret so there's no tonal difference.

Darkglass VMT does a great Ampeg impression.

No - is there much of a change?

I like it a lot. The tone control in particular is very useful - much like in the M900 amp I tried it with my Urge II (mainly because my P-Ray has proper old thuddy flats on it which sound crap with drive!) and it was thick, chunky and clear. As the Urge II is really a posh P bass it already has a loads of mids so the new Mid button was overkill and not in a good way. But I imagine that being very useful with a Jazz bass or other naturally mid scooped bass. The Grunt switch is excellent. If the blend is at 100% it might be a bit OTT depending on the amp settings, but when used with a bit of blended clean it gives some excellent..... heft..... to the low end drive. It's definitely more aggressive than the B7K too. The biggest problem I now have is that it won't fit on my Nano board unless I remove something. So over the holidays I might dig out my Pedaltrain Junior and load it with all the drive pedals I own for a proper comparison.

http://www.ovnilab.com/ and his top picks http://www.ovnilab.com/reviews/toppicks.shtml

Marshall ED-1. Very under-rated. I love it. Can be a little noisy at high settings, but for common use no problems. Despite having Cali / Empress / DG compressors I still use one a lot.

Version 2 is supposed to be more like the circuit in the M900 amp, so I'm very interested to see how close that is. Will give it a go this evening.

Just to clear up the Bernard Edwards thing - he swapped to rounds in the late 70s. Here is Nile confirming it.

I'm a singist too. I've got 2 TC Helicon boxes - the Harmony Singer and the Mic Mechanic. The HS is very good, but it gets all the harmony info from a guitar. If I'm just chugging R 5 R power chords then it doesn't know if I'm in major or minor - it needs more info to work. When it's done right it works very well. Singing a note and then just swapping between say A major and A minor makes a big difference. You can also give it a bit of a heads-up by playing the intro chord before you actually start the song. As always though - the more subtle in use the better it is. If the generated harmony is too loud then it's a bit crap. Subtle is the key. The MM is awesome. It doesn't do harmonies. It's just really a preamp but it has a preset de-esser, EQ, and compressor in it. There are 2 presets (notionally 1 male and 1 female but it's more about range than anything else) and the tighten up the vocal beautifully. Just set your PA flat and let the MM do the work. It also has verb and some gentle pitch correction. It's always in my gig bag.