Official Luthiers Forum!

No resume required, Kim...just a pulse. This is the US gubmint we're talking about here.

Chris,

Don't want to pick a fight....

I agree that the way this was handled by the government was way overkill and ham handed!

However, the facts show that this was not a coerced statement of guilt. Most of the press reports have the following quote:

From AP, ABC News, etc.
"The settlement shows a Gibson employee learned during a 2008 trip to Madagascar - the source of the ebony wood that was seized - that it was illegal to import unfinished wood and sent a report to his superiors, including company President David Berryman."

They clearly knew it was wrong and rolled the dice and got caught (as they should have)

Just one more example of today's problem of situational ethics. If you don't like a law work to change it. If you ignore it and get caught, pay the price.

And can you explain the difference between "finished" and "unfinished" wood per India's laws? I suspect you do not understand this as well as you think you do.

Raiding any place with guns drawn seems to be the norm with the Federal police force... places have had raids with SWAT teams for much less serious things (like copyright violation).

_________________
Cat-gut strings are made from kitten guts, stretched out to near breaking point and then hardened with grue saliva. As a result these give a feeling of Pain and anguish whenever played, and often end up playing themselves backwards as part of satanic rituals.

Typhoon Guitars
http://www.typhoon-guitars.com

Gibson's website has posted the settlement. I'm no lawyer, so I'm sure I got it all, but it seems while they lost the wood from Madagascar, they are getting back all the wood from India, and will be able to continue trading with India. Or did I miss something?

_________________
Phil

http://www.oleninstruments.com

"Those who tilt at windmills are only considered insane by those who can't see the dragon."

There's two very different issues here. The wood from India was, according to the Indian government, legally exported. The U.S. interpetation of Indian law deemed it to be illegal under Indian law, and therefore in violation of the Lacey Act.

Madegascar is in such conflict that what is legal depends on which faction is recognized as the legitimate government.

_________________
A man hears what he wants to hear, and disreguards the rest. Paul Simon

True, and part of the problem is that Lacey requires buyers to abide by foreign govt's laws, but allows US govt to interpret another country's laws differently than the country itself interprets them.

As for the drawn guns - the gov agencies have proceedures thatmust be followed in raids of any kind for officer safety, Im sure their hands were tied on this - however as for the scenario where you have some lawyers arriving and presenting papers, while observers documented wood reserves - Im sure that was more than sufficient in this case..
Cheers
Charliewood

Yes, they did. In fact, in other threads on this subject someone posted links to articles with pictures of armed men in SWAT getups entering the front door of Gibson's offices, and another of an armed man "guarding" a pallet of wood with Gibson employees nearby with their hands on their heads as though they were under arrest.

Anyone want to work at Gibson under those conditions?

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

Anyone want to work ANYWHERE in the US under those conditions?

Once we're all high on ebony dust no one will care.

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic

Excellent point, Charlie.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

Yes! Madagascar ebony toilet paper is quite lush and comfy on my butt.

_________________
Another day, another dollar.

_________________
Billy Dean Thomas
Covina, CA

"Multi famam, conscientiam, pauci verentur."
(Many fear their reputation, few their conscience)

There is a positive aspect to this .
Madagascar and Indian woods are no longer being illegally harvested as a result of the Gibson settlement .

I doubt that the Gibson settlement has much or any effect on illegal harvesting of wood from Madagascar. The majority of wood from Madagascar went & probably still goes to China.

The wood from India was not illegally harvested, they were accused of exporting wood that was not a "finished product" as Indian law requires. Indian law prohibits the export of raw wood - boards, logs, etc.

Kevin Looker

_________________
I'm not a luthier.
I'm just a guy who builds guitars in his basement.
It's better than playing golf.

Oh, please. You keep telling yourself that little bit of hoohah.
And if it happens again to someone else?

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

Folks, a couple of thoughts.

The settlement by Gibson in this matter resolves nothing -- it was in Gibson's best interest financially (not to mention the risk of criminal findings) to settle.

Madagascar is complicated. Even in private meetings, USFWS acknowledged that Madagascar is "messy" (note that this comment was made generally, and was not directed specifically at Gibson, on which understandably they were not at liberty to comment). In 2000, the then Madagascar government passed a law prohibiting the harvesting and sale of wood from their national forests. Another government came to power and overturned that rule. And so a turnstile of governments and policies followed. Much of the wood that was harvested, wasn't destroyed, but stored. When another government came to power and permitted its sale, it was sold.

Gibson, Martin, Taylor and others were invited to Madagascar by EIA to see the deforestation in Madagascar. Taylor and Martin chose to no longer purchase wood from Madagascar. Gibson chose to pursue "grey market" (Gibson's words) ebony from Madagascar. This comes from an internal Gibson email.

So the question then is, was the ebony Gibson purchased on the grey market, legal or illegal given the timing and regulations in place at the time. We don't know this (or at least it isn't in public evidence). At the very least, even if Gibson didn't actually purchase contraband ebony they acted in bad faith in pursuing materials that they knew were likely in violation of the Lacey Act.

The question of India is different, and many folks here are misinterpreting the applicable laws. The question of whether the Indian fingerboards were legally harvested was never asked. The Lacey Act makes no distinction between regulations regarding harvesting or transportation of plant and plant products -- a violation of either is citable. In this case the question revolves around Harmonized Trade Codes that are established by the World Trade Organization, to which India and the United States are signatories. The question here was whether a fingerboard blank constitutes a "finished" part. According to WTO definitions, it is not. It isn't even close. A finished part is defined as something that will not undergo any further processing. A raw fingerboard blank does undergo further machining, therefore it isn't a finished part.

Where Gibson comes into it was that their intransigence in addressing the initial raid with regard to the Madagascan fingerboards likely put them on the radar for any other shipments. The fingerboard blanks from India were identified with the Harmonized code for a finished part, which as I've discussed is inaccurate. What makes this complicated is that the Indian department of trade, not by law, but by decree, decided that a fingerboard blank is a finished part. They did this to get around a law passed around 1978 that prohibits the exportation of unfinished domestic hardwoods over the thickness of 6mm. Backs and sides are less than that and are exported under the HTC for veneer. Fingerboard blanks, being closer to 10mm are therefore being illegally exported under India's own laws, as well as in contravention of the WTO codes. USFWS/DOJ cited Gibson/LMII for importing wood that was incorrectly identified, i.e., raw versus finished, as well as for importing wood that was illegal under India's own laws. I agree, it's bs, in that India needs to request WTO issue a harmonized code for fingerboard blanks and amend their law to permit their export. What's irritating is that India's been doing this for over thirty years, so when it became an issue why it had to be escalated to a raid and citations is beyond me. I did ask USFWS officials why it had to come to this instead of when they realized there was a conflict to approach the Indian government and say, there's a problem and we can't let your wood in until you straighten it out. Needless to say, they weren't at liberty to comment. However, it is inaccurate to suggest that USFWS/DOJ is misinterpreting Indian law, because they are not.

I would love to believe that were true; I would also love to believe that money grows on trees.

David, there you go bringing facts into a discussion. What a buzz kill!




Just kidding.

David,
Thanks for another informative and well-reasoned post.

_________________
George :-)

Comfy yes, but how do you know when you are done?

_________________
Bryan Bear PMoMC

Take care of your feet, and your feet will take care of you.

Thank you very much for your clarification, Mr. Berkowitz. I stand corrected, it is a small but important distinction between law and policy, particularly when the "policy" is to ignore the "law" (refering to the Indian government).
My experience has been that an enforcment agency's policy is as least as important as the law. The policy can be in direct contradiction to the law, but it requires SOMEONE to take the issue to Court before the enforcement agency can be induced to change their policy to comply with the law. I only deal in local, state, and federal regulations, and the difficulty goes up exponentially as each layer of laws, rules, and policies is added. International in addition would be even worse.

_________________
A man hears what he wants to hear, and disreguards the rest. Paul Simon

Great post, David -- thank you.

_________________
David Malicky

India has the right to interpret their laws how they see fit (none of our business). Their interpretation said the fingerboard blanks were legal. The US government has no business interpreting India's laws or any other countries differently than the country who made the law.

Another problem is that the US isn't applying this standard equally. Why was Gibson singled out and not Taylor, Martin, and every other US instrument builder? This is where it's political......and the current administration is NOT using "equal justice under the law" as the standard.

If it's policy to raid American companys with gun in hand for non-violent offenses, then the policy AND the policy makers need to be thrown out!

_________________
Formerly known as Adaboy.......