Dad3353 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 1 minute ago, fretmeister said: Not at all. its a plea for removing all Limelight’s and everything with disclaimers or anyth7ng flagged with adequate proof. And updated rules to be agreed by every seller that what they are selling is legitimate AND that if discovered otherwise the seller will indemnify the buyer AND the owners of BC. And a rule that says - if the seller added the logo then they know it’s not legitimate (Fender do not sell logos at all, ever) and should not be listed. Is the selling of a bass with an unauthorised logo on it against the law, or is it not..? Your posts up to now seem to suggest that it is. Therefore BC must not allow them, or risk becoming 'second defendant' in a court case. Yes or no..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul S Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Interesting scenario - i did this. I had a Fender Precision Lyte bass that had a badly refinished body that was almost but not quite the matching colour for the original headstock. I had the body refinished, sanded the headstock down to natural wood and had a duplicate decal made with the original serial number. Where does this fit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 We seem to be arriving at a situation which creates additional work for the unpaid volunteer mods because of a single member with an agenda. Fantastic start to the year. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 I don't think it really matters as long as the listing states what it is even if it's a total replica to every detail as long as it is a private seller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prowla Posted December 28, 2017 Author Share Posted December 28, 2017 12 minutes ago, fretmeister said: Thing is, Trigger Broom types can be easy. Seller has a genuine Fender neck and a mighty might body. Selling them together is illegal. Unscrewing the neck and selling as “1 genuine neck and 1loaded body (PS they screw together well)” solves the issue. Difficult the other way round as the body forsnt doesn’t have the logo. In this case, the Fender logo is there, put there by Fender, so no need to do anything (provided it's not being sold as a Fender instrument). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretmeister Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Dad3353 said: Is the selling of a bass with an unauthorised logo on it against the law, or is it not..? Your posts up to now seem to suggest that it is. Therefore BC must not allow them, or risk becoming 'second defendant' in a court case. Yes or no..? Yes. It is against the law. Second Defendant in a civil case is a possibility. (Unlikely in a criminal matter). Would only happen if seller refused to refund the buyer. BC is not the seller. A proper system of reporting and removal of offending items is likely to be a defence against a claim as a 2nd Defendant (basically as eBay do it) Indemnity clauses in the T&C for the classifieds mean you can recover any outlay from the individual seller. Edited December 28, 2017 by fretmeister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Just now, stingrayPete1977 said: I don't think it really matters as long as the listing states what it is even if it's a total replica to every detail as long as it is a private seller. Prepare yourself to be disabused of that notion by our resident legal expert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 It was easy to ban the Ric content from the forum because most of the members can't stand the clanky neckdiving tat anyway 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, stingrayPete1977 said: It was easy to ban the Ric content from the forum because most of the members can't stand the clanky neckdiving twät anyway That's no way to speak of Mr John Hall. Edited December 28, 2017 by skankdelvar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 7 minutes ago, skankdelvar said: Prepare yourself to be disabused of that notion by our resident legal expert. Oooh matron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 7 minutes ago, skankdelvar said: That's no way to speak of Mr John Hall. The profanity filter strikes again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Just now, stingrayPete1977 said: The profanity filter strikes again! Now circumvented with an umlaut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlfer Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 1 minute ago, skankdelvar said: That's no way to speak of Mr John Hall. 5th pleaded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prowla Posted December 28, 2017 Author Share Posted December 28, 2017 7 minutes ago, skankdelvar said: We seem to be arriving at a situation which creates additional work for the unpaid volunteer mods because of a single member with an agenda. Fantastic start to the year. There is no nefarious agenda - a question was asked and a load of people jumped in. The guesstimate is maybe 1% of ads. And the protection for unwitting buyers should be a positive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretmeister Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Did silly billy really get auto corrected to tat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretmeister Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 silly billy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Just now, fretmeister said: Did silly billy really get auto corrected to tat? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretmeister Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Ha ha hahahahaha. Tw@t is corrected to Silly Billy! Ha hahahahahahahahaha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlfer Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 P i s s e d became whizzed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 1 minute ago, prowla said: There is no nefarious agenda - a question was asked and a load of people jumped in. IIRC, the question was asked only after you'd already jumped into a for sale ad here to express your view about logos. Moreover, Karl alleges you recently piled into his FB ad. Look, it's OK if you want be a logo vigilante. Do what you like; no one can stop you. But with respect I don't think this thread was started from a neutral viewpoint and as a disinterested solicitation of opinion. I do think that it will end up making more work for the mods and for microscopic practical gain. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcnach Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 24 minutes ago, fretmeister said: Thing is, Trigger Broom types can be easy. Seller has a genuine Fender neck and a mighty might body. Selling them together is illegal. Unscrewing the neck and selling as “1 genuine neck and 1loaded body (PS they screw together well)” solves the issue. Difficult the other way round as the body forsnt doesn’t have the logo. sigh... we've moved fast from "this is illegal" to "however, here's a loophole". And all... for what? Is anybody here seriously suggesting changing anything in the way the FS subforum is run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretmeister Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 10 minutes ago, mcnach said: sigh... we've moved fast from "this is illegal" to "however, here's a loophole". And all... for what? Is anybody here seriously suggesting changing anything in the way the FS subforum is run? It’s not a loop hole. It’s the selling of 2 separate but compatible items. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimothey Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, fretmeister said: It’s not a loop hole. It’s the selling of 2 separate but compatible items. Is that like selling a non-fender guitar with a fender logo separate ha ha sorry I’m just being facetious Edited December 28, 2017 by Jimothey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 43 minutes ago, skankdelvar said: Now circumvented with an umlaut. It's all dutch to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Didn't Francis Rossi have a 'loop hole' in his Fender? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif.9ad672bb8b84505709f76b39c8c256ec.gif)
Recommended Posts