Well, just to digress a little. But please indulge me. I played golf once with a guy who was quite a big deal for a major sauce comapny. And I was explaining to him what I do with my chicken baste/marinade. Maybe a bit naive of me but I divulged some real inner secrets. The biggest being the apricot jam. Smooth, not chunky.

Then, some time after that, I spotted this oke's brand on the shelf at the SPar. A chicken baste nogal. So I thought well it's a golf tjom so let's support. And when I used it and ate the chicken it tasted pretty much like my chicken tastes. So, I think they are putting the apricot jam in. Smooth, not chunky.

I'm a little bit upset, but not very. Do you think there is a chance to snake this company for some money with a lawsuit?

Tokai SA wrote: http://www.premierguitar.com/articles/21198-slash-hats-off?page=3

Gibson won't complain about that!

Read the part I underlined.

"then somebody handed him a re-issue style Les Paul Standard"...in other words the Kris Derrig "Appetite Les Paul", and that somebody was Guns and Roses manager Alan Niven who bought it from a shop.

If Slash was handed a Tokai, or Burny, Greco, Navigator, Ibanez, etc, it would have read, "somebody handed him a counterfeit Gibson", but because Slash was handed the Kris Derrig "copy" they call it a "re-issue style Les Paul Standard"...then they copy the copy and release the Custom Shop "Slash signature Appetite for destruction" signature model...and then tell me I'm selling "counterfeit Gibsons". ?

http://www.slashsworld.com/equipment/guitars/59-les-paul-replica-built-by-kris-derrig/

I rest my case.

Thanks for your comments.

Btw, why can't I see the Logout link?...in fact I see no links on the top of the page.

Amen to that.

Tokai SA wrote: Btw, why can't I see the Logout link?...in fact I see no links on the top of the page.

Please post that in the Site Feedback section. (Actually just look around there and you'll find the answer.)

So Gibson (not all the owners-sorry julle) is going to try convince us that Tokai LP and SG models are just counterfeit Gibsons, but the problem is: The don't say "Gibson" or "Made in U.S.A." anywhere and they also clearly pride themselves on branding their models with THEIR OWN brandname. That all said, If Gibson wins the debate on Tokai being a counterfeit, what are they then claiming? That all the PRS, ESP, Ibanez, etc guitars that have a single cutaway made of mahogany are also counterfeits? Biggest irony is that Tokai does not copy any ANY current model Gibsons, only the construction method of the old redundant way Gibson used to build instruments. You know, when they were worth buying.

If GIbson wants us to buy Gibsons. They must build them properly.

Business 101: Cut out competition, raise prices, cut corners and costs to increase profit.
Unfortunately they got the order wrong. You can't cut corners before cutting out the competition.

ryanguit wrote: Of course all the guys buying (and selling) Gibsons are going to try convince us that Tokai LP and SG models are just counterfeit Gibsons, but the problem is: The don't say "Gibson" or "Made in U.S.A." anywhere and they also clearly pride themselves on branding their models with THEIR OWN brandname. That all said, If Gibson wins the debate on Tokai being a counterfeit, what are they then claiming? That all the PRS, ESP, Ibanez, etc guitars that have a single cutaway made of mahogany are also counterfeits? Biggest irony is that Tokai does not copy any ANY current model Gibsons, only the construction method of the old redundant way Gibson used to build instruments. You know, when they were worth buying.

If GIbson wants us to buy Gibsons. They must build them properly.

Business 101: Cut out competition, raise prices, cut corners and costs to increase profit.
Unfortunately they got the order wrong. You can't cut corners before cutting out the competition.

What's with the sweeping statement about "all the guys buying (and selling) Gibsons"? In fact, if you go back through this thread it appears that the vast majority of people dislike Gibson's modus operandi re litigation, QC and resting on laurels, and that includes everyone who owns Gibsons, at least according to their signatures (or I know it independently). Also, most people have shown a lot of respect for Tokai.

In fact the only people who have come out swinging against Tokai have been pretty roundly shouted down by everyone else (and don't identify themselves as Gibson owners). So pound on Gibson all you want, but the Gibson players on here have played with a straight bat.

True. guitarforum.co.za is not a representation of what people say in person and on YouTube. I truly apologise for the generalisation. I came out swinging in a brawl that didn't exist. And worse, late. Cheers. I'll edit it shortly.

Sorry, man. I'm being over sensitive. Thanks for the classy reply.

Jeez, this must be the most civilized spot on the internet.

?

My five cents... Were all musicians with preferences. I prefer Tokai above Gibson... but I dont hate on anyone who prefers Gibson above tokai or Fender above Tokai or whatever... I think the key here is to stick to your preferences. Respect other peoples preferences and keep on keeping on at the end of the day. I do get very riled up however when there's weekend warriors who clearly have no basis to form an opinion on other than what they read on other forums etc...

Dont disrespect me and i wont disrespect you. a guitar is a deeply personal thing and it should stay that way.

el guapo wrote:

ryanguit wrote: Of course all the guys buying (and selling) Gibsons are going to try convince us that Tokai LP and SG models are just counterfeit Gibsons, but the problem is: The don't say "Gibson" or "Made in U.S.A." anywhere and they also clearly pride themselves on branding their models with THEIR OWN brandname. That all said, If Gibson wins the debate on Tokai being a counterfeit, what are they then claiming? That all the PRS, ESP, Ibanez, etc guitars that have a single cutaway made of mahogany are also counterfeits? Biggest irony is that Tokai does not copy any ANY current model Gibsons, only the construction method of the old redundant way Gibson used to build instruments. You know, when they were worth buying.

If GIbson wants us to buy Gibsons. They must build them properly.

Business 101: Cut out competition, raise prices, cut corners and costs to increase profit.
Unfortunately they got the order wrong. You can't cut corners before cutting out the competition.

the Gibson players on here have played with a straight bat.

+ 1, I agree...they have and that's appreciated.

I've been following this thread fo quite a few days and there are such good arguments laid out I really didn't feel like I could add much to the conversation but it just occurred to me;

If I wanted to buy an instrument for 20k to 50k which is pretty much the whole Tokai/Gibson pricing spectrum - I sure as hell would know exactly what i'm buying - it's not like I'd go into a shop looking for a Gibson and walk out with a Tokai by mistake or under false pretenses and feel cheated. If I bought a Tokai over a Gibson it's because I chose to do so.

Gibson's argument of consumers being cheated is bull.. Anyone buying one of these instruments know exactly what they want. Now if I bought a Gibson les paul and it turns out it was a Chinese fake.......

Violins are proudly advertised as Strad or Guanari copies. Even says so on the label. Hehe

PJH wrote: The original question was "Do you consider Tokai guitar counterfeit"

The definition in the dictionary is: "made in imitation so as to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine".

Tokai puts their own name on the headstock.

Therefore the answer is No, they do not make counterfeit guitars.

They make copies or maybe "replicas" (a name that I prefer).

Case closed.

Case very much open, I'm afraid.

The definition in your (or any) dictionary is irrelevant. If this is a legal issue being raised in SA than it's the definition under South African law that counts. And I don't—like, it would appear from the comments, everybody else—have a sufficiently in-depth knowledge of that to answer the original question.

I certainly consider many Tokai guitars to be shameless rip-offs, even though they can also be very, very good musical instruments. Whether that is legally right or wrong in this jurisdiction, is another matter entirely.

"Analogous" examples from other jurisdictions are, frankly, unhelpful, as is the repeated stating that they were not the first and a very far from being the only shameless rip-offs on the market. As are comments seeming to suggest that the high quality of the instruments somehow diminishes the rip-off aspect.

I do know that South Africa has been beefing up its anti-counterfeiting laws, since the country is a major dumping-ground for counterfeit goods, and it could be that Gibson (or its representatives) has spotted a crack that could trip Tokai (or its representatives) up. If that's the case and if the Gibson side is correct, then Tokai guitars are—in South Africa—counterfeits; if not, then they are not. That's how the law works. Whether any of us "consider" them to be counterfeits is pretty much irrelevant...

Interesting, but I would be surprised if the law seeing something clearly labeled "Tokai" legally regarded it as counterfeit, keeping in mind future imports of cheaper brands could also be regarded as illegal if they had a 'similar shape"(and the economic impact of that?). Remembering this in a country where the vast majority could not possibly afford a "Gibson" even a "Epiphone" for that matter!

studmissile wrote: Interesting, but I would be surprised if the law seeing something clearly labeled "Tokai" legally regarded it as counterfeit, keeping in mind future imports of cheaper brands could also be regarded as illegal if they had a 'similar shape"(and the economic impact of that?). Remebering this in a country where the vast majority could not possibly afford a "Gibson" even a "Epiphone" for that matter!

Having dealt with commercial lawyers in several countries, nothing would surprise me!

For example, if the shape is considered (in SA) to be Gibson's property then a copy of that shape could well be regarded as "counterfeiting" (if the legislation that covers this is anti-counterfeiting legislation rather than more conventional IP protection). And if Gibson wins one case it has precedent that it can use to move rapidly against other suppliers of similarly-shaped instruments. I'm not saying that will happen—merely suggesting a way in which it might unfold...

Most counterfeiting cases involve products that most people can't afford (which is a key reason why they are likely to be faked, when you think about it).

I agree that the law works in mysterious ways, its wonders to perform. But it seems highly unlikely from a common-sense perspective that, even if a court rules for Gibson, that they'll declare them "counterfeit" as per Gibson's laughable slander - as opposed to in violation of copyright or trademarks or whatever bogus case they manage to slip through. The dictionary and the law do agree to a certain extent.

Well. I'll tell you one thing. It'll be sad to live in the only country in the world where a kid can't buy a strat copy. All those shameless rip-offs would only be available to everyone else in the whole world. But at least we could hold our heads high, knowing that we've made a great moral stand. ?