Cloning Ibanez specs w/ different woods: Unethical?

[clintsal]

My two favorite guitars to play are my MIJ S7420 and RG7421XL. But they both have a couple little things I would do differently if I could build them. My question is, would it be somehow unethical to give these guitars to a competent luthier to make clones in terms of measurements, but different woods/bridges/etc? Note that neither of these guitars are in production any longer. If I could get someone to do the woodwork and fretboard, I would take care of the hardware, finish and electronics.

As I see it, it would be a semi-custom job with a pre-existing template to work from, with no finish or electronics work for the builder. If there isn't an ethical problem with a project like this for the luthier, perhaps they could get some good business churning a few of these out:

The S7420 Clone:
Neckthrough with the same neck measurements (width, thickness, etc)
25.5" scale
22 frets
Ebony Board
3 Piece Maple/Bubinga/Maple
SS Frets
Mahogany Body, same general shape & thickness as the S7420
No trem route, Hipshot bridge

The RG7421XL Clone:
Again, neckthrough w/ same neck measurements (width, thickness, etc)
27" scale
24 frets
Maple board (birdseye?)
3 Piece Maple/Bubinga/Maple
SS Frets
Swamp Ash body, in the general RG shape
No trem route, Hipshot bridge


Again, I am asking specifically if there is some issue relating to ethics or the legality of asking someone to do this.

Hit me with some opinions. Luthiers encouraged.

 

[ZXIIIT]

I'm certain every luthier out there does not want a lawsuit from a big company, so as long as the necks don't have any Ibanez decals, logos or the Ibanez headstock shape, it should be fine.

Might be the same for the body though.

 

[Sepultorture]

PEOPLE DO REPLICAS WITH SPIN ON iBANEZ SHIT ALL THE TIME

damn caps, i'm at work, stupid cap only program

anyhow, no it's not unethical

unethical would be if you had a shole new guitar made right down to the exact mesaurements and shape and then slap an Ibanez logo on it, that would be unethical.

so do it up man

 

[JohnIce]

PEOPLE DO REPLICAS WITH SPIN ON iBANEZ SHIT ALL THE TIME

damn caps, i'm at work, stupid cap only program

anyhow, no it's not unethical

unethical would be if you had a shole new guitar made right down to the exact mesaurements and shape and then slap an Ibanez logo on it, that would be unethical.

so do it up man

Still not unethical to me However, selling that guitar further to someone without saying it's a replica, that's where I'd draw the line.

 

[AxeHappy]

Nothing even remotely unethical about making a guitar that is sort of related to another guitar.

 

[yingmin]

You're definitely in the clear on the legality of it, because there's no way Ibanez would go after a luthier who made two guitars for a custom order. Ibanez made their name on copies of other successful guitars anyway (and haven't really stopped after all these years), so it would be pretty hypocritical of them to go after someone for copying their work. Not to say that it wouldn't happen or hasn't happened, but in terms of scale, you're completely safe.

 

[ZXIIIT]

You're definitely in the clear on the legality of it, because there's no way Ibanez would go after a luthier who made two guitars for a custom order. Ibanez made their name on copies of other successful guitars anyway (and haven't really stopped after all these years), so it would be pretty hypocritical of them to go after someone for copying their work. Not to say that it wouldn't happen or hasn't happened, but in terms of scale, you're completely safe.

They do make similar guitars to other brands, but change certain thing to avoid legal issues.

Anything with an Ibanez stamp is copyrighted, so if any luthier does end up making exact copies and Ibanez see's fit that the copyright they own was violated, they will take legal action.

There's no sense in risking something like that just because you can get away with it, unless you build it yourself and don't sell it

 

[cyril v]

Go for it, post fuckloads of pics too please. Just don't throw an Ibanez logo on it and I don't see a problem.

edit: I didn't notice the part about "making a run of these" and profiting from this... thats probably not a good idea.

 

[yingmin]

They do make similar guitars to other brands, but change certain thing to avoid legal issues.

Anything with an Ibanez stamp is copyrighted, so if any luthier does end up making exact copies and Ibanez see's fit that the copyright they own was violated, they will take legal action.

There's no sense in risking something like that just because of how the laws were structured in the 70s or if you can get away with it (unless you build it yourself and don't sell it)

Like I said, though, they wouldn't bother with this luthier just based on the size of the operation. If he started churning out hundreds of these and stealing away from Ibanez's market share, then they'd have reason to take action, but one or two custom guitars that Ibanez will probably never even find out about? Look at the specs: all he's really doing is having guitars made with the same neck dimensions and basic body shapes. If that's enough for a lawsuit, then Ibanez is still in serious trouble.

 

[clintsal]

Thanks for writing up so fast dudes! So if it's not unethical or illegal, how much easier for a luthier would it be to build these using the original guitar right in front of them as the model, as opposed to designing a whole new shape/specs/etc? I don't know any well enough to ask this question to, so I'm bringing it to you guys.

I am now thinking of this idea from a business perspective, and without the hassle of doing the hardware/finish/electronics, it seems to me that this could be a fairly simple and profitable venture for a budding luthier. I am basing that thought on the fact that both S7420's and XL's are in quite high demand, no longer in production, and the people that would buy these clones would probably be competent enough to do the final touches themselves (at least here on SS.org).

The engineering costs would be low, the materials would be high-quality but not the most expensive wood species out there, the demand exists, there is the opportunity for economies of scale, and a significant portion of time-consuming work would be left up to the customer.

Does this venture turn anyone else on?

 

[clintsal]

Like I said, though, they wouldn't bother with this luthier just based on the size of the operation. If he started churning out hundreds of these and stealing away from Ibanez's market share, then they'd have reason to take action, but one or two custom guitars that Ibanez will probably never even find out about? Look at the specs: all he's really doing is having guitars made with the same neck dimensions and basic body shapes. If that's enough for a lawsuit, then Ibanez is still in serious trouble.

Since neither guitar is produced anymore, is this a non-issue?

 

[ZXIIIT]

Like I said, though, they wouldn't bother with this luthier just based on the size of the operation. If he started churning out hundreds of these and stealing away from Ibanez's market share, then they'd have reason to take action, but one or two custom guitars that Ibanez will probably never even find out about? Look at the specs: all he's really doing is having guitars made with the same neck dimensions and basic body shapes. If that's enough for a lawsuit, then Ibanez is still in serious trouble.

You have heard about the RIAA suing ONE person for "stealing copyrighted material" in the fewest of amounts?

Just saying, better to avoid a lawsuit while building a custom guitar

 

[yingmin]

You have heard about the RIAA suing ONE person for "stealing copyrighted material" in the fewest of amounts?

Just saying, better to avoid a lawsuit while building a custom guitar

Ibanez is not the RIAA, and building a custom guitar is not illegally downloading music. There's a huge difference between an advocacy group on a death-throes crusade and a company like Ibanez. This is exactly why the whole downloading issue is so hard to discuss: nothing is truly analogous to it.

Since neither guitar is produced anymore, is this a non-issue?

When I read the original post, I thought you just wanted copies of these guitars made for yourself, and threw out the idea of making more as an after thought. If you're thinking about this as a serious business venture, don't do it.

 

[darren]

So how do you guys feel about the ethics of copying the original designs of a small builder vs. those of a big corporation?

 

[clintsal]

When I read the original post, I thought you just wanted copies of these guitars made for yourself, and threw out the idea of making more as an after thought. If you're thinking about this as a serious business venture, don't do it.

Yes, the primary idea is still to have it done for myself. But when I started thinking about it from the builder's perspective, as long as there wasn't legal issues, it might have profit potential. And if just a tiny change in shape or design completely nullifies any legal concerns, I don't know why a builder wouldn't want to produce a handful to lower costs, guage interest, gain some experience, and hopefully positive exposure, without dealing with all the hassles of fully custom orders.

 

[clintsal]

So how do you guys feel about the ethics of copying the original designs of a small builder vs. those of a big corporation?

Ahhh, thank you for showing up! Your point is absolutely valid, and this is the reason I started the thread. When you put it in that perspective, it becomes a bit more difficult to justify building a run of these hypothetical clones, instead of just mine.

Where is the line between 'copying' a design and being 'inspired' by a design?

In my scenario, we are looking at these comparisons and contrasts:

Similarities:
Neck dimensions
Body shape


Differences:
Bolt-on vs. Neckthrough
Different woods
Hardware/finish/electronics all configured by the final consumer




How 'different' does a new model have to be to not be the 'same'?

 

[darren]

It seems the line is being blurred between "What's ethical?" and "What's legal?"

It sounds like you know there's an ethical issue, but you're asking questions like "How 'different' does a new model have to be to not be the 'same'?" which seems to say that you aren't concerned about the ethics of it... just the potential legal consequences if you get caught.

Copying someone else's intellectual property is unethical AND illegal, regardless of whether it's an individual person or a large corporation.

How would you feel if you wrote some riffs with your band, and a few months later, one of your bandmates leaves, joins another band and uses those same riffs in their songs? You'd be pretty upset.

 

[ZXIIIT]

Ibanez is not the RIAA, and building a custom guitar is not illegally downloading music. There's a huge difference between an advocacy group on a death-throes crusade and a company like Ibanez. This is exactly why the whole downloading issue is so hard to discuss: nothing is truly analogous to it.

Not saying Ibanez is the RIAA, just the fact that a huge company will go after one person, regardless of agendas or nature of crime committed, that was my point.

I would say woods and pickups are enough to not be the same

 

[clintsal]

It seems the line is being blurred between "What's ethical?" and "What's legal?"

It sounds like you know there's an ethical issue, but you're asking questions like "How 'different' does a new model have to be to not be the 'same'?" which seems to say that you aren't concerned about the ethics of it... just the potential legal consequences if you get caught.

Copying someone else's intellectual property is unethical AND illegal, regardless of whether it's an individual person or a large corporation.

How would you feel if you wrote some riffs with your band, and a few months later, one of your bandmates leaves, joins another band and uses those same riffs in their songs? You'd be pretty upset.

I am really really glad you joined our conversation. Yes, I acknowledge that there may be an ethical violation, depending on one's ethics. However, I would not be the one to undertake this project. I am no luthier, only a hobbyist player with a perpetually active business mind.

The reasons I am asking these questions is so that if I were to approach a luthier with this proposition, whether it be my 2 guitars, or a run of them, I have an idea of the issues that would cross the builder's mind, as well as potential customers and Ibanez themselves.

My goal here is quite simple: to have 2 guitars built to have the same feel as my two favorites, with woods and configurations that better suit my tonal tastes. In this form, I don't feel there is any ethical gray area.

The idea of having someone make more than just mine came about as I was thinking of the question 'why would someone want to do this for me, instead of trying to sell me up to a full custom?' I then started thinking of the business prospects, and considered the things I discussed above.

I have not asked anyone outside of this forum in this thread, about any of this. And I don't plan to until a full discussion has been had. So I really appreciate the input you have all given so far.

Respect.

 

[Eric Christian]

My question is, would it be somehow unethical to give these guitars to a competent luthier to make clones in terms of measurements, but different woods/bridges/etc?

No more unethical than Ibanez copying a Fender Stratocaster in the first place...