For all the lovers of exquisite naked exotic woods here

[anorakDan]

Much of what Mr. Jones says is essentially true, although he's making a mistake by burying it in so much rhetoric and exaggeration. The message is going to get lost because people will stop listening early on as the messenger appears to be fanatic. It would appear that he's a Rush Libaugh wannabe, but he hasn't done his due diligence so he's not going to get the attention he craves or deserves. You can't say "billion" when you mean "million", or "trillion" when you mean "billion". Plus, he doesn't focus. I understand he wants to tell us a lot of things that perhaps we don't know, but it would be better if it weren't all in one sitting.

That's exactly the impression I got. Just another budget-priced Limbaugh. Turned me right off the message.

 

[pabloman]

This is a problem that I've pointed out for a long time.  There are so many laws on the books that 1. it is impossible for anyone to say with 100% certainty that doing any specific thing is legal or not; and 2. that nearly every single person in the country (with possibly the exception of anyone under the age of 3 or so) could be prosecuted for violating some law.  I hope Gibson is able to fight this and come out victorious and I hope the rest of the industry will support them in their fight.  Sad state of affairs . . . . and people wonder why business people don't want to invest in their companies here!?

For some strange reason I have a feeling all the other companies are going to stay behind the curtain and let Gibson take the brunt of this. While it affects everyone, I think Gibby's letigious ways may hurt their ability to gain allies in the court room. After all Gibson is by far the biggest company impacted by this and I can't imagine having the smaller guys on their side will do much. I believe and hope that third party involvement can help.  :headbang1:

 

[Jusatele]

This is a problem that I've pointed out for a long time.  There are so many laws on the books that 1. it is impossible for anyone to say with 100% certainty that doing any specific thing is legal or not; and 2. that nearly every single person in the country (with possibly the exception of anyone under the age of 3 or so) could be prosecuted for violating some law.  I hope Gibson is able to fight this and come out victorious and I hope the rest of the industry will support them in their fight.  Sad state of affairs . . . . and people wonder why business people don't want to invest in their companies here!?

For some strange reason I have a feeling all the other companies are going to stay behind the curtain and let Gibson take the brunt of this. While it affects everyone, I think Gibby's letigious ways may hurt their ability to gain allies in the court room. After all Gibson is by far the biggest company impacted by this and I can't imagine having the smaller guys on their side will do much. I believe and hope that third party involvement can help.  :headbang1:

I am with you all the way on this Pablo, the recent lawsuits may have created enemies that have power to stir the pot.

 

[Cagey]

This is a problem that I've pointed out for a long time.  There are so many laws on the books that 1. it is impossible for anyone to say with 100% certainty that doing any specific thing is legal or not; and 2. that nearly every single person in the country (with possibly the exception of anyone under the age of 3 or so) could be prosecuted for violating some law.  I hope Gibson is able to fight this and come out victorious and I hope the rest of the industry will support them in their fight.  Sad state of affairs . . . . and people wonder why business people don't want to invest in their companies here!?

Well, there's the law, and then there are regulations. When you can't get a law passed due to congressional philosophical imbalances, you simply modify the regulations issued by legally recognized institutions such as the OSHA, FCC, FDA, DEA, EPA, DOA, DOE, ad infinitum. Perhaps even appoint some "czars" who can create regulations where none existed in the past. All that has something of the force of law, although it can be fought in the courts if you have enough money. Of course, the gummint always has enough money, not to mention time and lawyers, so you may as well go pound sand.

This is why business is so terrified right now. It's not just economics, it's the business environment. There's plenty of money out there, almost free for the asking. But, you don't know where the next kick in the balls is going to come from or how much it's going to cost you. So, everybody just sits on their hands and waits for some indication that this is a free country and not a socialistic dictatorship. Nobody's investing, nobody's hiring, nobody's expanding... it's all just sitting there rotting. Eventually, it'll all just collapse. Happened to another super-power some of us might remember - the USSR.

 

[drewfx]

Before we jump to the wrong conclusions as to exactly who is behind this law, take a look at this:

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), who introduced the Illegal Logging Act, said, "This legislation addresses an illegal logging crisis. Oregon workers and communities are threatened when American companies are forced to compete with illegal foreign imports. Stopping the importation of illegal timber helps protect the environment, supports living wage jobs and levels the playing field for American manufacturers.

(from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/U.S.+Senate+passes+Illegal+Logging+Act.-a0175549275)

So it's not exactly anti-business, if you happen to be in the US timber business that is. Because they were in favor of it.

 

[SkuttleFunk]

I have yet to see plywood or paper made from

- Rosewood
- Ebony
- Ivory
- Paua or Abalone shell

if this was truly about protecting lumber jobs, then the woods specified would be more aligned with industry

R

 

[Tipperman]

This seems a little (very) ridiculous to me. If your guitar is from the 1920s, and it's 2011, why the bloiting blit should you need to fill out paperwork? It's long-since-harvested wood. I hate politics.

 

[drewfx]

I have yet to see plywood or paper made from

- Rosewood
- Ebony
- Ivory
- Paua or Abalone shell

if this was truly about protecting lumber jobs, then the woods specified would be more aligned with industry

R

The Lacey Act doesn't specify the woods itself. It says http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/lacey_act/downloads/background--redlinedLaceyamndmnt--forests--may08.pdf:


It is unlawful for any person—
(1) to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish or wildlife or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or in violation of any Indian tribal law;

(2) to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce—

................

(B) any plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State; or
(B) any plant—
(i) taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State, or any foreign law, that protects plants or that regulates—
(I) the theft of plants;
(II) the taking of plants from a park, forest reserve, or other officially protected area;
(III) the taking of plants from an officially designated area; or
(IV) the taking of plants without, or contrary to, required authorization;
(ii) taken, possessed, transported, or sold without the payment of appropriate royalties, taxes, or
stumpage fees required for the plant by any law or regulation of any State or any foreign law; or
(iii) taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any limitation under any law or regulation of
any State, or under any foreign law, governing the export or transshipment of plants;



So if something isn't permitted under either something like the CITES treaty or even a foreign law, you can conceivably be subjected to the broad forfeiture provisions of, or possibly even prosecuted under, the Lacey Act.

 

[Steve St.Laurent]

It's unintended consequences.  Congress passes laws and then the bureaucracy applies them in ways that weren't intended but meet the "letter" of the law.  This happened a few years ago with the lead law and childrens motorcycles.  The lead law was passed to keep toys with lead content from hurting children.  Then the CPSC said that any products that could be used on childrens products could have no lead in them.  In motorcycles there is lead in some of the alloys in the engine, valve stems, etc - but kids don't EAT their motorcycles.  So the CPSC said that manufacturers had to test each and every piece on the motorcycle to prove it didn't have lead content and there was a $100k per instance (so say one part on a motorcycle has any lead then they have to pay $100k x how many motorcycle they sold) fine.  Not only that but if it was a part that was used on both adult bikes and childrens bikes (as many parts are) those had to be lead free also.  It caused a huge problem in the industry with getting parts for adult bikes, kids bikes were pulled off the market, etc.  It's 3 years later and they still haven't fixed it.  This sounds like the same sort of thing.

 

[Strat Avenger]

Much of what Mr. Jones says is essentially true, although he's making a mistake by burying it in so much rhetoric and exaggeration. The message is going to get lost because people will stop listening early on as the messenger appears to be fanatic. It would appear that he's a Rush Libaugh wannabe, but he hasn't done his due diligence so he's not going to get the attention he craves or deserves. You can't say "billion" when you mean "million", or "trillion" when you mean "billion". Plus, he doesn't focus. I understand he wants to tell us a lot of things that perhaps we don't know, but it would be better if it weren't all in one sitting.

That's exactly the impression I got. Just another budget-priced Limbaugh. Turned me right off the message.

He's nothing like Limbaugh. Limbaugh won't even touch the things that he talks about. While Alex doesn't know everything, and I don't necessarily agree with everything he says, he brings up serious questions and concerns that no one in the mainstream will discuss, because they (and our society) are too caught up in Football, and "Dancin' With The Stars" to be worried about their liberties being taken from them one piece-at-a-time.

 

[DeepSouth]

This whole FBI thing reminds me of the Blues Brothers.

Guitar Buyer: Can you tell me if this neck is made of rosewood or ebony? What were the guitar maker's personal habits? Was the guitar maker quiet? Did he make much noise?

Guitar Salesperson: OMG are you from the FBI

Guitar Buyer: No ma'am we're musicians. :laughing7:  :icon_scratch:  :laughing7:

 

[m4rk0]

now they are taking our Ash too!!!  :icon_jokercolor:

http://www.newser.com/story/126640/how-bug-warfare-could-save-the-baseball-bat.html

 

[SustainerPlayer]

now they are taking our Ash too!!!  :icon_jokercolor:

http://www.newser.com/story/126640/how-bug-warfare-could-save-the-baseball-bat.html

Yeah - they have a bit more attack than alder.

 

[Cagey]

now they are taking our Ash too!!!  :icon_jokercolor:

http://www.newser.com/story/126640/how-bug-warfare-could-save-the-baseball-bat.html

Doesn't anybody ever learn from history? Displacing species to alter the natural balance of things almost never works out. Ask any Australian who knows his history for some major examples, but many exist here as well.

 

[Schlieren]

I'm of many minds on this turn of events.

On the one hand, Gibson kiping a bunch of hot wood wouldn't be all that surprising; have you seen how much they charge for their guitars?  A corporation capable of committing one crime - highway robbery - is thereafter capable of committing any other number of crimes.  And the protection of endangered species is a power I happily grant our law enforcement bodies: if they're guilty, set the chair to extra crispy.

On the other hand this "guilty until proven innocent" garbage is easily what could drive anybody to start ranting about the United States transforming into a police state.  And, well... it has been.  However, while it's hard to imagine our ever-expanding surveillance state has managed to bull its way into such an esoteric niche as exotic woods, at the same time this is how such a surveillance state operates: it picks out one potential target and inflicts massive monetary damage upon it (or, in other examples, it imprisons him or her for years without charging a crime).  It doesn't matter if there's guilt or not, that's not the point.

The point is to create a climate of fear, and from the looks of the responses to this thread, I'd say congratulations: mission accomplished.

The "no politics discussion" guideline here is a good one - we here in the States aren't very well-accomplished in discussing, well, anything without getting too heated about it, and hurt feelings all around wouldn't make for a good environment for discussion - and I cringe at dancing along that line, however: we're all here for the love of great guitars, and this sort of thing right here is where the two unavoidably intersect.

 

[Strat Avenger]

Yeah, I don't want to talk "politics" here either, but when it affects the very topic that this forum is about, it's pretty difficult not to.

Our government can send assault firearms to the Mexican drug cartel, yet they'll crack down on a guitar company for buying wood that "may" be on the protected list. It's crap.

With that said, and as much as I disagree with what has happened to Gibson, it's kind'a like "Karma" in a way. When you look at how litigious they have been, along with the previously mentioned "highway robbery" prices they charge for guitars that are not up to the same quality standards as Gibsons from decades ago, it's hard to feel sorry for them.

 

[bagman67]

To give Gibson its due, "highway robbery" in this case is just the open market - they charge a price that enough folks are willing to pay that they can continue to do it.  Most folks who are in favor of capitalism would call this an example of  things working they way they are supposed to.

To ascribe criminal intent to Gibson on this basis is some pretty weak logic indeed, and is really unhelpful in analyzing the situation. 

As far as I'm concerned this is an instance of regulatory overreaching in order to make a point with a high-profile target.

 

[Schlieren]

To ascribe criminal intent to Gibson on this basis is some pretty weak logic indeed, and is really unhelpful in analyzing the situation.  

As far as I'm concerned this is an instance of regulatory overreaching in order to make a point with a high-profile target.

I agree with this to a certain extent.  I suppose I'm projecting a bit, since I work for a company so numbers-driven and predatory that someone in it getting caught skirting or flaunting regulations isn't terribly surprising.

Gibson's pricing structure might reflect the "market" but the "market" isn't some marketplace of rational actors finding perfect equilibrium based on empirical value, it's a morass of irrational emotion.  The emotion I most easily attribute to Gibson's pricing structure is hubris.  That sort of arrogance has spilled over into their litigious behavior, and it's not hard to imagine that it might also spill over into a disregard for protecting valuable, limited natural resources.

It's a tenuous chain of reason as you've pointed out, but at the same time, I'd hope you'd at least give me that it's not altogether without precedent.

 

[pabloman]

People are confusing the Lacey Act and the CITES treaties. Do your homework then spout off.

 

[Strat Avenger]

People are confusing the Lacey Act and the CITES treaties. Do your homework then spout off.

The news reports mentioned the Lacy Act.