Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Non-Fender S-Type Guitar Forum' started by california2020, Apr 22, 2021.
buy the guitar not the story
Where did you get this from? And if that were to be true, why would the US Gov go ahead and put fake Fender decals on the guitars and committing fraud against a US company?
I'm not much of a collector either, but the connection to Viet Nam has a lot of meaning to me...but being made in the PI, well there were untold vets in the PI who never had to go to 'Nam, so it would be awful hard to prove, if not impossible.
I'd say anyone who has a real connection with such a thing should own it. For everyone else it's just a conversation piece...
A counterfeit from 45 or 55 years ago is still a counterfeit. Customs is supposed to stop these at the border, but of course some get through. Selling this guitar is illegal in the United States and in any country that's signed the Madrid Protocol on trademarks (i.e., most of the world).
The other trouble with the story is there's nothing to connect this guitar to the story. This guitar could have been made last tuesday, and the connection to Vietnam could be as phony as the guitar is. Shocking to imagine, but somebody who's willing to illegally sell a counterfeit product might also be willing to lie about it.
On top of that, this is clearly an extremely low quality copy. My $47 Goodwill Squier is way better than this--and isn't illegal to sell.
The information is out there and readily available. Google to your hearts content.
Lawsuit guitars did exist back then. And while the decal is an issue, I would assume that either Fender allowed it to occur or they were oblivious to it. But why wouldn't they put Fender decals on them? Think about it. You volunteer or get drafted to war to kill for your country, you're going through hell. Not that anything would make that situation better, but wouldn't you rather know that a great american company supports you or would you rather hear "sorry boys, we tried to get Fender to back you but they just don't believe in your efforts for our great nation". Yeah, it's morally wrong, but at the same time, it's kind of a gray area. That's why, though I can't prove it, I believe Fender was aware of it. But the servicemen guitars started in 1959/60. They weren't meant to last. It really didn't hurt Fender at all. If anything, soldiers that returned home may have bought Fender gear simply because of their "support".
I was watching a video the other day of a serviceman head a Felter in the same Fender script it was a bit beat up but interesting none the less, it had a white face with the top half at a slanted angle and gold Felter logo and knob labels
"The information is out there and readily available. Google to your hearts content."
Just Google it, Bro!!! Case closed
Not my responsibility to do your homework.
@california2020 it would not really be collectable , they are a novelty and interesting. More so if someone gave you one or you found one in your attic. All the photo's I've seen of them ( a handful at best ) they have a very deep colored aged neck like the photos the lads have posted. Your example seems a little to pristine to me. but I'm not a expert I'm just going on my limited experience of reading about them and seeing pics.
Plenty of info about these on the net.
Good article here. Good photos.
The book "365 Guitars, Amps and Effects You Must Play" (great book!) has an entry on fake GI Fender Products
When I was in the navy 1950s
You could get a perfect BMW motorcycle copy...
Put it on
Military Sea Transportation Service (MSTS)From Japan
Hit the Beach(Hong Kong)
A $500.00 suit for $79.00
It would be ready by the last water taxi before Midnight ( Cinderella liberty) back to the ship
I'll refrain from sharing my thoughts on the subject, and what I think of anyone who would exploit ... it.
And if you had done yours you wouldn't have referred to them as Lawsuit guitars in the first place
Think you should reread that post. I didn't specifically call the servicemen guitars lawsuit guitars. I was making a point that trademark infringement was heavy in that era.
This scenario isn't funny.
It is, however, ridiculously stupid. And I'm done going in circles with you.
That's true, but you did make a reference to Lawsuit guitars being around back then. A statement that is equally wrong. You'd have been more correct if you had referred to them as pre-lawsuit guitars.