Is this actually true?

[guitarnut1980]

ok of all places I was on ebay, and one of the auctions for a submarine Charvel, the description said that it was one of the last "Artist Similar" guitars, and that since the FMIC take over getting an artist replica is out of the question, is this true, and if so what are some of the other new rules i must know about if i were to ever want to place a custom order

[neilli]

Yeah, it's true if you can't get written permission from the artist direct to Jackson.

Likewise, copyrighted graphics (beer bottles, cartoon characters) are out unless you can get permission.

Body shapes owned outside of FMIC are out i.e. no Gibson shapes like Firebirds, classic Flying Vs and Explorers.

And finally, no strat headstocks on custom Jacksons. Charvels yes, Jacksons no.

[guitarnut1980]

this is really depressing! should have seen it coming with the early two thousands catalogs with all the customs all over the covers, i guess from now on i can call them the watch it go catalogs. i mean what if the artist is no longer with the company, doesn't it make that policy obsolete. For instance

A. guitar player, endorses jackson/charvel, and has a one off built, that makes it an artitst similar guitar which cannot be reproduced.
B. guitar player leaves and goes to espee or ibancrap, the artist is no longer affiliated with the company there for makeing the original options standard and non restricted due too no further involvement by the artist, say i wanted a dinky with on hum and one single in the neck with dot inlays, reversed headstock and snow white finish, now i cannot aquire that because Rowan Robertson was shown with one in a catalog. or maybe the solistst with the large checker boards similar to the ones Dave Sharmen played.

help me out

[AK47]

Yes that was me running my mouth on my Charvel Lynch guitar auction...


and to answer your questions.
A. Possibly they may make it, when you submit your quote form dont say you are basing it off of a artist guitar it may slip by.
B. Just try not to tell Jackson you want a custom like so and so uses and they will probably make it otherwise they will just say no if you ask for a custom exactley like so and so's guitar. Even if the artist is no longer with Jackson it does not matter.

[neilli]

Basically, my understanding is that with the 2 guitars you mentioned, you'd probably be OK cos neither are totally unique to that player. It's more about stopping someone ordering a strathead starbody with a budweiser graphic or a dinky Rhoads with the Ninja turtles on it (both of which fall foul of the star-replica and copyright graphics rules).

Which begs the question - would they make a metallic silver KV with 2 hums, 24 frets and a Kahler fixed bridge i.e. it's a Mustaine spec guitar, but the KV has kind of transcended that I'd have thought....

Whatever, I've been told that as long as there's some 'visable' change from the artist guitar, you should be OK, especially if no reference is made to said artist when it comes to quoting the guitar. Witness the 'oh no, it's not a Jake E Lee guitar honest' run that was put together recently....

[Newc]

The King V was Jackson's design, not Mustaine's. He may have asked for a smaller body than the Double Rhoads, but as I understand it, Jackson already had that in progress when he adopted it.
I've read a couple of interviews where he expressed disdain for the Kahler bridge, calling it a tonesucker, and stating he did not know why Jackson put them on.

This was when the KV-1 was his sig model, so that leads me to believe they just put his name on a guitar they already had.

[AK47]

Jake E lee did not invent the strat body but they still wont do that. Its kind of a really stupid rule.
I heard they will not do any KV1s as I really would like a silver sparkle with Kahler.

[Trem]

Doens't seem to stop Other companies from doing Artist Similiar Jackson Copies

I'ts really stupid, even if your not basing a guitar on an artist model, but it's exactly what you want, they are going to tell you no?
Dumb.

[Newc]

Isn't the Kelly an "Artist Similar" model itself? What about the Rhoads?

They're JACKSON'S designs, so I don't see where the problem is other than getting a specific graphic or artist signature (specific name decal) on it. I mean, yeah the Disruptor and Roswell Star are Amir Derakh's things, but since no one else wants them, they don't matter

[toejam]

They did do the Amir camo last year, complete with swastika, then the crybabies came out of the wood work and said it was not cool, so they painted over them.

Amir's original.

[Robert Hendrix]

I can see where this is coming from. It's just a form of them covering their asses no matter how extreme it is. It kinda sucks though because I remember seeing Keel back in the 80s and noticing the Twilight Zone guitar that Brian Jay had. (Did a quick google search and couldn't find a picture of it) I've always wanted a guitar with that paint scheme and figured if I ever got financially able to order a CS Jackson, that would be the one I'd want. I guess it won't happen now unless I find a REALLY good artist to do it on an already existing guitar.

[Jacksonite]

NEWC is right.. it all boils down to who has the rights to the design...

Dave owns the rights to the Y2KV, as HE disigned it.. The KV1 is just a version of thier existing guitar. Also, the MM1 has to be approved by Mark, and the PC1s by Phil, and the Demel by Phil.. as they were the designers.. (as I understand it)
Jake E Lee owns the rights to that paint job I think, as it was called the "jake E Lee Burst" so I dunno, kinda like the "frenchie Paint Job" no rights to it, joo no gettin it

[RR05xx]

With fender, it has less to do with onwership of rights as fender lawyers looking to avoid all possible problems (real or imagined). So if you want a blue burst strat, they will do that. Slant the singles in a certain why and now you are doing a Jake thing that they know is a Jake thing and they know it is a Jake thng because they were told that the concept was going to be a Jake run when the ordering process of started. They are dumb, but not that dumb. Same thing goes if you have a copyrighted graphic- like a Warner Bros character etc and try to get that without WB's written permission, then that is a dead issue. Now if you get the rights from the owner, or your get the original player involved, that changes the story. Gibson thing is more of a "we are not hypocrits - we are not going to steal yours, so dont steal ours" move as fender does not want to be seen as doing exactly what it is trying to get others to stop doing (thus the licening agreement on s-head charvels/jacksons, so if they sell the company, there will be no dispute that the s-head does not go with it).

The Lynch run was ordered and started before the policy hit, and because sub was really a charvel design that Lynch just happen to use once years ago for a little while (and a vid - just got lucky), they went ahead (its not like George is pulling an EVH and saying he owns the design). However, with the no artist policy, the green run that was planned was soon killed (at least in part - the fact that they cound not seem to build the first runto the approved build sheet did not help) .

Contrast the WD guitars. With Warren on board, fender is happy to build all the WD guitars that you want, all except the frenchie, because after the first one (or so) they determined that regardless of who used to play it, the art work on the frenchie was copyrighted and they apparently could not get the rights. I thought they had worked that out later but honestly stopped paying attention.

So, if you have a design in mind which artist related, but not super obvious or something they are aware of, it seems that if you just order it to spec without mentioning anything about where you got the idea, there is a reasonable chance they will built it (particularly if you change something).

See Amir guitar above. Original was a soloist, not a bolt on charvel, so the "re-make" when directly under the radar as they say.

[j2379]

if someone ordered a soloist with SD specs w/dot inlays with bound neck & headstock in certain colors would it be considered a Vai or jeff beck guitar? that would be silly

[AK47]

if someone ordered a soloist with SD specs w/dot inlays with bound neck & headstock in certain colors would it be considered a Vai or jeff beck guitar? that would be silly

Submit a quote, thats how I find out about these policies.

Before anyone gets on me about submitting quotes and not ordering, I do order plenty or did from the CS so they have to deal with my custom quotes from time to time its just a part of life but I am not a tire kicker.