Fuchs Dumble Clone

[Smitty]

Thanks, everyone, for your comments. Martin made some particularly interesting comments. What if we establish where the ethical line is for an amateur one-off build and then build off of that? What I'm hearing him say is that building an exact replica replete with 'by Dumble' screened onto the faceplate is OK for personal use. Do we all agree (I do)? What about gigging out with it (I would)? Yes or no? What about selling your one-off build to fund another project? As long as the buyer knows it's a knock-off? Gotta scrape of the ink?? Let's draw a line in the sand.

[jelle]

Hard No to building amps with Dumble's name on it if you are not Dumble.

I am not OK with any of that.

Why?

Because I have had three instances over the years where I had to tell a customer that his precious Dumble amp that he just bought, was a fake.

If you build one, its your responsibility that nobody gets conned. If you gig with it, and it gets stolen, or if you decide you no longer need the amp and sell it, or after you die. Just do not create a mess. Don't be that guy.

[Smitty]

Thanks, Jelle. I'm interested to know what the folks paid for the fakes. Do you happen to know?

[jelle]

Those were $60K+ numbers. And those customers have sufficient funds to have someone taken care of too, if they get pissed off enough. Very dumb game to play.

[jelle]

I want to add that I very much respect Andy and the business he built up. Its not a dig at him, but at the use of the Dumble name of non Dumble products.

[Smitty]

Thanks, Jelle. This is very helpful information for this discussion. One could build an exact replica and sell it for $6k as a clone (as Andy did) and someone could resell it for $60k as an original (as did the sellers to your clients).

And yes, I'm not saying anything bad about Andy. All of my interactions with him have been positive. I wonder if the back panel of that amp is clearly marked as a Fuchs or a clone.

[martin manning]

... and someone could resell it for $60k as an original (as did the sellers to your clients).

And, even if it is marked as a replica, someone could potentially remove any markings to that effect, maybe even add some silicone goop, or otherwise make it look more like an original and sell it as one.

[JD0x0]

If someone is going to spend 60k-200k+ on an amp, it's kind of their responsibility to properly authenticate the product they're trying to purchase just like how someone buying expensive artwork should be doing the same, to ensure they're not purchasing a counterfeit. Not saying I support building counterfeit amps, but at the same time, hard to have any sympathy for someone who wont even do the bare minimum to make sure what they're purchasing is legit.

[Charlie Wilson]

Is this a real Dumble or a reproduction?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34Y3lHpKXWY
CW

[Smitty]

I think we are beginning to surface some relevant concepts:

There are some do's and don'ts around building replicas
-the more accurate the replica the harder it is to distinguish from an origianal
-things like mfr badging on a car or an artist's signature on a painting are ways that the market in general rely on to distinguish authenticity
-placing 'by Dumble' on an ODS that is otherwise an exact representation can cause a buyer to think it was actually made by Howard Dumble

There are some do's and don't around selling replicas
-every effort should be made to do no harm to the buyer
-misrepresenting a replica as original is wrong
-a replica that is later sold as an original generates culpability that flows upstream to the original seller and creator

There are some do's and don'ts around buying collectable items
-the item should be authenticated beyond a reasonable doubt
-the community that supports the category of collectible items should support transactions through guidance on authentication
-transaction support should include presenting reputable authenticators to the market
-if reputable authenticators are not widely available the community should protect buyers with information on risks

In Charlie's last post the challenge to identify the amp in the clip as either authentic or not is the challenge that Dumble amp transactions face.
-the builder is generally not accessible to buyers
-there is no 100% accurate registry of built amps
-there is no community of dealers that can suggest reputable authenticators
-some sellers are unscrupulous

I think what we are saying as a community is that the risk that a replica/clone Dumble amp could be misrepresented as an original is multiplied greatly by including 'by Dumble' on the chassis. And that culpability for bad things that happen can flow upstream to persons without intent or malice of forethought like someone who 'builds for fun'. I think in law it is called 'willful neglect', but I'm not a lawyer. This community of builders recognizes the there is no community of dealers that are working to reduce risk of misrepresentation in transactions by making authentication services available to prospective buyers. As a community we discourage the behavior of including 'by Dumble' on your replica build because it has the potential to bring harm to future buyers.

Thank you everyone for your contributions. Although some will feel like these conclusions should be obvious I feel like I understand this better now after having discussed it with you. Please respond if there is more to include.

[martin manning]

Is this a real Dumble or a reproduction?

Unless HAD is building new amps in a multicolored 80's-style, I'd say it's a repro. Who knows? Maybe he is.

I think we are beginning to surface some relevant concepts...

I think those are all good points. Nice work pulling that together. Caveat emptor is the byword, as it is in all transactions involving collectibles.

[Smitty]

Thank you, Martin.

[jelle]

Thank you, Smitty, very well put. I agree 100%.

[jelle]

Is this a real Dumble or a reproduction?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34Y3lHpKXWY
CW

Its a counterfeit amp, made in California. Its pretty easy to spot to the trained eye.

[FUCHSAUDIO]

Okay: Here we go (again): Many moons ago, a few famous musicians and friends (Andy Brauer and others) suggested that I give Dumble the domain, as a show of good faith and to move on from the fodder surrounding my owning it. "You're doing your own thing, let it go man....". So I did. I contacted HAD and said "it runs out at the end of this month, just take it"). Unlike prior e-mails (which were nasty), this e-mail thanked me for "my noble decision to give him his rightful family name and domain".. The clock ticks... When the domain was halfway to the end of the renewal month (and being told "my people will take care of it") Mr. D then said "I need you to take care of this. It costs a few bucks, but I cannot do it". I told him that it was given to him freely and for free, and I wasn't about to pay anything, plus I needed personal information that I didn't care to know to do it. I also said if he didn't take care of it I would simply renew it. In the meantime, there was a very major endorsement opportunity in play, which was quashed by Mr. D (ouch). I then locked up the domain going forward. If he wants it, it could be purchased. It's owned, by me and it's shelved and basically takes you nowhere. Not to my company, not to anything but a funny picture. He was freely offered it at no cost and he basically didn't act on it, while in the meantime pulled some dirty pool. Sorry, not much else to say here. It's been posted too many times, and I'm tired of typing it up.

Secondly. why it's necessary to post pics from a nearly year-old Reverb listing escapes me but (as Jelle pointed out), it's so blatantly obvious that it's not a real D*mble it's silly. It doesn't take even a "trained eye" to see that the panels (front and back) are lexan, the chassis (although similar) is constructed quite differently, it has chassis straps on top, and the internals are PTP, but no attempt at-all to replicate a D-style layout was made. Not to mention the (genuine) cowhide covering, which I don't think Howard ever offered....It was made to sound like a good D-style amp (and man, it came out great actually), but it's so obviously fake, it's silly. Sure, over the last 10 or 15 years there were a handful (maybe ten or less) visually similar D-style clones I've built, but I no longer do it (I don't have the time nor inclination), and there are plenty of people globally who could help you fill that need these days. That amp lives in Tennessee last I heard, and the customer loves it.

Yes, I own ODS (c) as a trademark, as well as the many product names we make like Overdrive Supreme, Clean Machine, Mantis, Verbrator, etc....I don't own (nor care-to own) Dumble's name or any of the marks he hasn't protected over the years.

We can give this silliness a rest whenever you guys are ready....