It is currently Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:35 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:27 am
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:27 am
Posts: 4473
Location: Paris France
sikoniko wrote:
you know, I'm not sure I understand why its not OK for him to do his own reproduction. arguing that it is protecting the fender model doesn't make sense to me. as long as he doesn't try and sell it as that model why does it matter? from everything I have seen, wasn't it jimi who painted the guitar? did he copyright that art? please enlighten me...


There have been 210 Monterey Stratocaster guitars, each hand painted by Pamelina H, from Jimi Hendrix own design.
I'm sure the Jimi Hendrix Estate was given what they asked for that .
If he wants to knock off a substitute for his own use, he can find many photos of that guitar on internet.
If he is not satisfied by the quality of such photos, I, as an owner of an original one, won't help him copying such design.
I'm to release a guitar site and I removed any close up photo of that guitar.


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:29 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:09 pm
Posts: 863
Location: Columbus, Ohio
I honestly cannot believe this guy actually asked for Alain's help in knocking off a Monty... are people that selfish? if anything, google image "Monterey Pop Stratocaster" or just look at the hundreds of photos online of John playing it. it really isn't that complex of a design that it requires super hi-def photos to begin with.

I'm all for replicas of replicas, but when it comes to making them, don't post publically for Fender higher ups to see on a forum. epic fail right there. that's the kind of sh** that got Libertyfalls deleted.

_________________
http://www.twitter.com/CAE_Music


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:40 am
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 10:59 am
Posts: 144
alainlafrance wrote:
sikoniko wrote:
you know, I'm not sure I understand why its not OK for him to do his own reproduction. arguing that it is protecting the fender model doesn't make sense to me. as long as he doesn't try and sell it as that model why does it matter? from everything I have seen, wasn't it jimi who painted the guitar? did he copyright that art? please enlighten me...


There have been 210 Monterey Stratocaster guitars, each hand painted by Pamelina H, from Jimi Hendrix own design.
I'm sure the Jimi Hendrix Estate was given what they asked for that .
If he wants to knock off a substitute for his own use, he can find many photos of that guitar on internet.
If he is not satisfied by the quality of such photos, I, as an owner of an original one, won't help him copying such design.
I'm to release a guitar site and I removed any close up photo of that guitar.


well, I'm not arguing your right to share or not share the design on the guitar. :D you're right, it will be up to whoever wants to make a copy to find his/her own sources.

my statement was around the artwork. If it was not copyrighted, it is fair game to reproduction.

However, I don't think it is fair to try and say someone should feel shameful or that he/she is doing something wrong for wanting to make his/her own reproduction. especially if the person is doing it for personal use.

for the sake of argument, I don't see how it would de-value your "collectors" item. I would be interested in knowing how much the guitar has spiked in value since John Mayer started endorsing it. I remember seeing one of those guitars hanging on the wall at a local fender dealer and thinking how cheesy it was that a lanyard was put on the guitar. it is possible that right now that guitar is at its peak value because of john mayers endorsement and in 10 years when he is but a footnote in rock, that guitar will drop in value. perhaps now is the best time to cash out if you are in it for collecting?

[rant]It really surprises me that we are talking about a reproduction of a guitar and getting passionate about it. I've read numerous books about Jimi. Know how he bought his guitars? He bought 3 or 4 brand new ones at a time that were hanging on the wall. he didn't even play them before he bought them. he didn't buy "vintage" guitars. clapton, beck, Santana, none of those guys play vintage guitars live... we talk about how pre-cbs is the holy grail... hendrix's favorite strat was a CBS strat... [/rant]

However, I will counter my own previous statement and say that IMO, pre-cbs is just a better guitar. I can't afford one, so that is why I buy the custom shop models.

anyways, alain, I know you are a well respected member and I am a newbie. I hope I have not offended you. It certainly is not my intent. :)


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:48 pm
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:10 pm
Posts: 13467
Location: Palm Beach County FL
sikoniko wrote:
you know, I'm not sure I understand why its not OK for him to do his own reproduction. arguing that it is protecting the fender model doesn't make sense to me. as long as he doesn't try and sell it as that model why does it matter? from everything I have seen, wasn't it jimi who painted the guitar? did he copyright that art? please enlighten me...

Kind of like asking the US Mint to help you counterfeit a one dollar bill. This Forum is just not the place to copy the plates. :wink:

_________________
"Another day in paradise!"


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:15 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 10:59 am
Posts: 144
ZZDoc wrote:
sikoniko wrote:
you know, I'm not sure I understand why its not OK for him to do his own reproduction. arguing that it is protecting the fender model doesn't make sense to me. as long as he doesn't try and sell it as that model why does it matter? from everything I have seen, wasn't it jimi who painted the guitar? did he copyright that art? please enlighten me...

Kind of like asking the US Mint to help you counterfeit a one dollar bill. This Forum is just not the place to copy the plates. :wink:


Well, if Jimi painted the original, but he did not paint the reproduction; fender commishioned someone else to paint, then how is it any different? Is Fenders model a "counterfeit"? under your analogy I would say so. :shock:

Making a reproduction of the artwork on the guitar is not illegal unless it was copyrighted. Was it copyrighted?

even if Fender has an "exclusive" agreement to reproduce that guitar, it would only be that it is approved by the hendrix family to use his name or likeness in advertising. I don't believe someone can posthumously copyright a work of art...

I'd be interested to know... I would assume that art is public domain though...

[/url]


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:55 pm
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 1129
Location: UK
This really isn't about "art!"


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 5:36 pm
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:10 pm
Posts: 13467
Location: Palm Beach County FL
sikoniko wrote:
ZZDoc wrote:
sikoniko wrote:
you know, I'm not sure I understand why its not OK for him to do his own reproduction. arguing that it is protecting the fender model doesn't make sense to me. as long as he doesn't try and sell it as that model why does it matter? from everything I have seen, wasn't it jimi who painted the guitar? did he copyright that art? please enlighten me...

Kind of like asking the US Mint to help you counterfeit a one dollar bill. This Forum is just not the place to copy the plates. :wink:


Well, if Jimi painted the original, but he did not paint the reproduction; fender commishioned someone else to paint, then how is it any different? Is Fenders model a "counterfeit"? under your analogy I would say so. :shock:

Making a reproduction of the artwork on the guitar is not illegal unless it was copyrighted. Was it copyrighted?

even if Fender has an "exclusive" agreement to reproduce that guitar, it would only be that it is approved by the hendrix family to use his name or likeness in advertising. I don't believe someone can posthumously copyright a work of art...

I'd be interested to know... I would assume that art is public domain though...

[/url]


Then take it back to square one. Prior to even making the request for the images, the firstquestion which should have been put was to the nature of any trademark or copyright agreements in the development and release of that project and its 'art'. Do not assume that art is public domain because I know of a particular case involving a Peter Max issue which was handled by my intellectual properties friend that refutes your assumption to the nines. In addition, if you go to Pamelina's website, you find a link to an image of guitar #4 of that run and a very clear copyright designation in the upper right hand corner. I would expect that, given the aforementioned, the original request violates Pamelina's copyright.

Thus, this entire discourse is without merit until such time the question is clarified with respect to the agreement between her and Fender. Perhaps best put to Mike Eldred's Forum.

_________________
"Another day in paradise!"


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 6:59 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 10:59 am
Posts: 144
ZZDoc wrote:
sikoniko wrote:
ZZDoc wrote:
sikoniko wrote:
you know, I'm not sure I understand why its not OK for him to do his own reproduction. arguing that it is protecting the fender model doesn't make sense to me. as long as he doesn't try and sell it as that model why does it matter? from everything I have seen, wasn't it jimi who painted the guitar? did he copyright that art? please enlighten me...

Kind of like asking the US Mint to help you counterfeit a one dollar bill. This Forum is just not the place to copy the plates. :wink:


Well, if Jimi painted the original, but he did not paint the reproduction; fender commishioned someone else to paint, then how is it any different? Is Fenders model a "counterfeit"? under your analogy I would say so. :shock:

Making a reproduction of the artwork on the guitar is not illegal unless it was copyrighted. Was it copyrighted?

even if Fender has an "exclusive" agreement to reproduce that guitar, it would only be that it is approved by the hendrix family to use his name or likeness in advertising. I don't believe someone can posthumously copyright a work of art...

I'd be interested to know... I would assume that art is public domain though...

[/url]


Then take it back to square one. Prior to even making the request for the images, the firstquestion which should have been put was to the nature of any trademark or copyright agreements in the development and release of that project and its 'art'. Do not assume that art is public domain because I know of a particular case involving a Peter Max issue which was handled by my intellectual properties friend that refutes your assumption to the nines. In addition, if you go to Pamelina's website, you find a link to an image of guitar #4 of that run and a very clear copyright designation in the upper right hand corner. I would expect that, given the aforementioned, the original request violates Pamelina's copyright.

Thus, this entire discourse is without merit until such time the question is clarified with respect to the agreement between her and Fender. Perhaps best put to Mike Eldred's Forum.


I got lazy in calling art in general public domain when I meant that specific piece of art.

So what you are saying is Pamelina made an exact copy of Hendrix's art and she copyrighted it to herself? Since I think it is fair to assume Hendrix did not copyright it, which is what I meant in the referenced post, it would have been public domain until someone else copyrighted it. This would be legal, though unethical - don't you think? Is that the type of business you'd want to support?

I find this a fascinating conversation and hope noone is taking me out of context. I have no stake in it. I understand wanting to protect the value in an investment, and as I stated earlier, mean no disrespect to alain.

You are right though. Unless Mike were to tell us, I doubt we will know of fully understand. Since I have rarely seen ME post more than two words in a reply, I doubt that will ever happen.

Now an example that I do think would be wrong is if someone were attempting to make copies of EC's crash guitars for resale.

Someone wanting to replicate a guitar that was destroyed 40+ years ago and having people take offense to it seems nonsensical to me. Jimi offered his guitar up as a sacrifice when he set it afire. He was not business savvy, and I'm not sure he'd want or understand why people would want to reproduce it. He never attempted to recreate it... though his V has some similar drawings on it. In every interview I've seen of him, he often shied away from idolotry. He was an artist. plain and simple.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 8:11 pm
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:10 pm
Posts: 13467
Location: Palm Beach County FL
......I am not saying that and, for the sake of brevity, there are enough sites accessible to piece together the story of the Custom Shop project. Their guitar, of which 210 were done, has a very different look from The Montery Strat 2008 c.Pamelina H, nor am I able to tell you how close her rendition came to the original painted by JH, or the copyright agreement between her and Fender for the CS project.

Since I think it is fair to assume Hendrix did not copyright it, which is what I meant in the referenced post, it would have been public domain until someone else copyrighted it. This would be legal, though unethical - don't you think? Is that the type of business you'd want to support?..

.........I put that question to my friend with respect to Disney's copyright of the name "Simba"....and not the first time they've done something of that sort....or.....McDonald's....."Mc"-ing everything under the sun and calling it theirs. That part of the law is very interesting and extremely technical, and can be argued case by case. Far be it from us, here at this time.

INow an example that I do think would be wrong is if someone were attempting to make copies of EC's crash guitars for resale.

Ed Roman will do it for you to the nines. How he is able to legally is not known to me.

Someone wanting to replicate a guitar that was destroyed 40+ years ago and having people take offense to it seems nonsensical to me. Jimi offered his guitar up as a sacrifice when he set it afire. He was not business savvy, and I'm not sure he'd want or understand why people would want to reproduce it. He never attempted to recreate it... though his V has some similar drawings on it. In every interview I've seen of him, he often shied away from idolotry. He was an artist. plain and simple.[/quote][i].....

............I have no personal knowledge of the entirety of the art on the original, nor am I prepared to declare or argue what his purpose in setting that guitar alight and then destroying it was. Some interpret his actions on the stage floor that day as a sexual foray of sorts. We'll never know for sure, and knowing Jimi, if he offered any explanation of it, it was likely deep, mystical, and totally incomprehensible to anyone save himself, if at all. Both he and Dylan had that talented shtick for taking the public where the public thouight it wanted or needed to go, even if it were off a cliff. That's show biz!![/i]

_________________
"Another day in paradise!"


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:31 am
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:27 am
Posts: 4473
Location: Paris France
sikoniko wrote:
alainlafrance wrote:
sikoniko wrote:
you know, I'm not sure I understand why its not OK for him to do his own reproduction. arguing that it is protecting the fender model doesn't make sense to me. as long as he doesn't try and sell it as that model why does it matter? from everything I have seen, wasn't it jimi who painted the guitar? did he copyright that art? please enlighten me...


There have been 210 Monterey Stratocaster guitars, each hand painted by Pamelina H, from Jimi Hendrix own design.
I'm sure the Jimi Hendrix Estate was given what they asked for that .
If he wants to knock off a substitute for his own use, he can find many photos of that guitar on internet.
If he is not satisfied by the quality of such photos, I, as an owner of an original one, won't help him copying such design.
I'm to release a guitar site and I removed any close up photo of that guitar.


well, I'm not arguing your right to share or not share the design on the guitar. :D you're right, it will be up to whoever wants to make a copy to find his/her own sources.

my statement was around the artwork. If it was not copyrighted, it is fair game to reproduction.

However, I don't think it is fair to try and say someone should feel shameful or that he/she is doing something wrong for wanting to make his/her own reproduction. especially if the person is doing it for personal use.

for the sake of argument, I don't see how it would de-value your "collectors" item. I would be interested in knowing how much the guitar has spiked in value since John Mayer started endorsing it. I remember seeing one of those guitars hanging on the wall at a local fender dealer and thinking how cheesy it was that a lanyard was put on the guitar. it is possible that right now that guitar is at its peak value because of john mayers endorsement and in 10 years when he is but a footnote in rock, that guitar will drop in value. perhaps now is the best time to cash out if you are in it for collecting?

[rant]It really surprises me that we are talking about a reproduction of a guitar and getting passionate about it. I've read numerous books about Jimi. Know how he bought his guitars? He bought 3 or 4 brand new ones at a time that were hanging on the wall. he didn't even play them before he bought them. he didn't buy "vintage" guitars. clapton, beck, Santana, none of those guys play vintage guitars live... we talk about how pre-cbs is the holy grail... hendrix's favorite strat was a CBS strat... [/rant]

However, I will counter my own previous statement and say that IMO, pre-cbs is just a better guitar. I can't afford one, so that is why I buy the custom shop models.

anyways, alain, I know you are a well respected member and I am a newbie. I hope I have not offended you. It certainly is not my intent. :)


No offense my friend, we are just discussing about the repro of a guitar :wink:


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 6:39 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:10 pm
Posts: 13467
Location: Palm Beach County FL
The bottom line is this. The Fender project was a design creation by Pamelina based upon something Jimi drew up shortly before his performance. The Fender project is history. Pamelina's company will refinish any Stratocaster guitar in The Monterey '08 design for about the cost of an American Deluxe....sooooo.....the OP could buy a used MIM, dirt cheap and have it dressed up to the nines. Suggest he visit the Pamelina website and make his life easy. Some things are just not worth the squeeze. This is one of them. Of course, if motivation is great, a penny saved is a penny earned towards the real deal. Someone on this planet is going to be willing to let go of one of those '97's at the right price.That's what collectors do. :wink:

_________________
"Another day in paradise!"


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 9:41 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:08 am
Posts: 9034
Location: Louisiana
:wink:


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:33 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:27 am
Posts: 4473
Location: Paris France
:wink:


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 7:07 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:09 pm
Posts: 863
Location: Columbus, Ohio
the OP could always go on ebay and copy pictures from the monty listed there (at 16k, mind you) maybe that owner would be willing to let him rip off the design :wink: :roll:

but yeah sarcasm aside I would say this thread is over.

_________________
http://www.twitter.com/CAE_Music


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: