Jump to content

Gibson Settles with the Feds


Anderton

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Here are the first of the links...

 

http://nashvillepost.com/news/2012/8/6/gibson_changes_its_tune_settles_with_feds

 

http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/news/200/gibsonguitarnonprosecution08062012/

 

I think the key reason there was a settlement instead of prosecution is contained in this phrase from the Justice Dept.:

 

"Gibson has acknowledged that it failed to act on information that the Madagascar ebony it was purchasing may [emphasis added] have violated laws intended to limit overharvesting and conserve valuable wood species from Madagascar, a country which has been severely impacted by deforestation."

 

By acknowledging that "may" wasn't good enough (as well as some other missteps described later) Gibson paid a fine, gave up claims to the existing wood that was seized, and wasn't prosecuted criminally.

 

I have mixed feelings about this. First of all, I always said my problem was with the way the raid was conducted, and we'd have to wait until all the evidence was in before deciding guilt or innocence, which at least in my mind is a separate issue. Well, I still believe the raid used excessive force, and didn't accomplish anything that couldn't have been accomplished by a surprise visit of a few officials to meet with management.

 

As to guilt or innocence, it seems like Gibson is saying "We're guilty, but we weren't totally sure at the time we were guilty and frankly, we didn't do enough to determine whether we were guilty or not." Reading down to the end of the second article, it gets into that whole thing of buying from someone who bought from someone:

 

"Gibson purchased 'fingerboard blanks,' consisting of sawn boards of Madagascar ebony, for use in manufacturing guitars. The Madagascar ebony fingerboard blanks were ordered from a supplier who obtained them from an exporter in Madagascar. Gibson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

"may" is just another way of saying "alleged" for a different purpose. Until they go in, confiscate the wood, trace where it came from, and prove that it was, indeed, purchased illegally, then they can only legally inform Gibson that what they have purchased 'may' have violated laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

F*****g government!! I'm just about as sick of them as a man can get. If one could list all the BS they are involved with against their own citizens, I'm sure it would make for a very long and deeply concerning read. The DOJ is out of control.

 

Obviously, it was a no win situation for Gibson either way so they took a prudent approach so they can get it behind and begin recovery.

 

I can see Gibson's point. They have lost so much already.........which brings up a point.......after all they have lost financially already....and also the cost of the seized wood......why do they still have to pay a fine? Like as in time served?

 

For me the injustice against Gibson goes way beyond just their alleged infraction and what Fish and Game/Wildlife...whoever... have on them or not....or that they have to pay a fine. It goes to how "justice" is being meted out in this country by an out of control government with a very dark long term objective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Also, from what I see...this is as relates to the FIRST alleged offense right? Where Gibson did kind of screw up by buying during the term of an interim Madagascar government or lack of one.....when even Fender and some others...Martin(?) declined as it seemed too dicey.

 

Is this correct?

 

I thought the latest "offense" had to do with India. So could it be like a plea bargain, where the DOJ drops criminal charges in all situations..... as long as Gibson pays a fine and publicly and formally eats crow by admitting wrongdoing or taking a bad gamble.....but only in the earlier Madagascar situation?

 

Dunno, I was reading it fast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Wow. $300K - wouldn't take lawyers long to rack up fees higher than that if it had come to a criminal trial...so, yeah, cut your losses and consider the big bullet as having been dodged.

 

Sloppy corporate behaviour? Or intentional illegality for profit? - surely we'll never really know for sure. Must not have been clear enough to make prosecution worth the trouble, either.

 

At least with regards to the Madagascar wood. But is this really the end of it all with respect to Gibson vs. USA? Are there any other shipments that are still being investigated? Could it be this was just clearing the ground before another, possibly bigger shoe drops?

 

UPDATE: just reread the Nashville Post article paying close attention:

 

In turn, federal officials said they will not charge Gibson criminally in connection with the company's ordering and handling of ebony from Madagascar and ebony and rosewood from India as long as Gibson meets the terms of the agreement and commits no future violations of law.

 

 

So maybe there is closure here - assuming future good behaviour, etc.

 

nat whilk ii

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Craig, pardon my french but F@#$ the Criminal Govt. It's fine for them to do unconstitutional and illegal things such as FAST AND FURIOUS, and the CIA bringing in narcodics, but they have to come down on Gibson who MAY have gotten the wrong wood? What a joke! This Govt is a joke and the longer we put up with it as a country the more of a joke we the people become...Sickens me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, I believe Gibson has always wanted to do the right thing with regards to their guitar production. But they admitted to wrongdoing either because they really believe there was an oversight, or because they just wanted to get it over with. If an oversight, whether it was from criminal intent (which I highly doubt) or sloppy "fact-checking" (which I think is far more likely), they did something for which they could get caught. Some people consider the fine a slap on the wrist, and therefore, the government was the party that just wanted to get it over with..."pay is the bucks, and we'll go away.":idk:

 

There's something about the whole scenario that still seems suspect, but at least it's over. However, the precedent of SWAT teams swooping down and intimidating American employees not over drugs, not over guns, but over the wood used in musical instruments has already been made, and I find that problematic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Craig s first post is basically on target from a legal perspective... both parties weighing the pros and cons of winding up in trial and not wanting to go there.

 

My biggest problem now and always has been is that we have American law enforcement agencies doing the bidding of foreign governments when the laws are at odds with our own Constitution. And we still have these iffy statutes that can be interpreted at any time to go after anyone else. And also the nature of law enforcement/citizen encounters in this post 9/11 world. Excessive is the word.

 

I'm not a world citizen first... I'm an American citizen first. Our rights and responsibilities as defined by American laws in line with the US Constitution is all that matters to me. We're living in a time when the status of "American Citizen" has been devalued and is under fire from many different angles. The Gibson encounter with the feds is just one manifestation of a much broader situation in which the very underpinnings of our free society are being dismantled little by little.

 

The Constitution is the contract between the federal government, states and individuals (US citizens) that allows the federal government to have any authority at all. The Constitution grants that authority based on Constitutional provisions. Good causes aren't good enough reason to disregard the Constitution. No reason is good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Funny how Gibson's own employee visited Madagascar and informed Gibson's buyer and president that the wood they were buying was illegal, Gibson continued to buy the illegal wood, but you know, since we like Gibson, when Gibson is guilty they're not really guilty...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What the hell is wrong with you people? We have laws in place to not turn the entire planet into a stinking {censored}hole, and that's a BAD thing?

 

Let's just go out and kill everything. Why not make a drum kit out of baby seal heads? Are you mad at the government for not allowing that? Somehow, most of the other hundreds and hundreds of instrument manufacturers have obeyed the laws. Why haven't the EVIL GUBBMINT attacked them in their innocence?

 

I'm going to introduce a line of guitar straps made from German Shepherd fur. Any buyers? Apparently you'd be upset if I was stopped in that effort. Oh, and send your dogs over... I need some raw materials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

SWAT teams at the door to investigate the proper licensing of a pallet of wood 15,000 miles away is enough reason to move operations overseas. The question I ponder is if Gibson simply sees this as 'a business expense', moves on, has the bucks to take the hit, or considers this an omen of things to come and figures that doing biz in the US has finally run it's course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CMS Author

Yea !!! I just bid on the confiscated wood on a "government seized items auction site"
:)

 

Yeah, I was wondering they were going to give back the wood that was confiscated, or if they'd just send it back to Madagascar where they can carve it into little statues of goddesses and sell them to tourists from the USA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Yeah, I was wondering they were going to give back the wood that was confiscated, or if they'd just send it back to Madagascar where they can carve it into little statues of goddesses and sell them to tourists from the USA.

 

 

Does it matter? Because other people might abuse the wood, it's OK for Gibson to do so? I suppose I can have sex with that 12 year old Guatemalan girl because if we send her back home she's just going to be sold into slavery anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, I believe Gibson has always wanted to do the right thing with regards to their guitar production. But they admitted to wrongdoing either because they really believe there was an oversight, or because they just wanted to get it over with. If an oversight, whether it was from criminal intent (which I
highly
doubt) or sloppy "fact-checking" (which I think is far more likely), they did something for which they could get caught. Some people consider the fine a slap on the wrist, and therefore, the government was the party that just wanted to get it over with..."pay is the bucks, and we'll go away.":idk:


There's something about the whole scenario that still seems suspect, but at least it's over. However, the precedent of SWAT teams swooping down and intimidating American employees not over drugs, not over guns, but over the wood used in musical instruments has already been made, and I find that problematic.

 

:thu::thu::thu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

What the hell is wrong with you people? We have laws in place to not turn the entire planet into a stinking {censored}hole, and that's a BAD thing?


Let's just go out and kill everything. Why not make a drum kit out of baby seal heads? Are you mad at the government for not allowing that? Somehow, most of the other hundreds and hundreds of instrument manufacturers have obeyed the laws. Why haven't the EVIL GUBBMINT attacked them in their innocence?


I'm going to introduce a line of guitar straps made from German Shepherd fur. Any buyers? Apparently you'd be upset if I was stopped in that effort. Oh, and send your dogs over... I need some raw materials.

 

 

either you're the only person in here who is sane, or you're the only person in here not willing to be manipulated by the way this is being spun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

But they admitted to wrongdoing either because they really believe there was an oversight, or because they just wanted to get it over with.

 

 

why no option for they admitted guilt because they were actually guilty?

 

Here's the thing:

 

Gibson was hyperaware of this issue, and tasked one of their employees to go to Madagascar and write a report. He did and found that buying unfinished wood was illegal and should stop. He sent his report to Gibson's president and purchasers. Their response? Continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I think Craig s first post is basically on target from a legal perspective... both parties weighing the pros and cons of winding up in trial and not wanting to go there.


My biggest problem now and always has been is that we have American law enforcement agencies doing the bidding of foreign governments when the laws are at odds with our own Constitution. And we still have these iffy statutes that can be interpreted at any time to go after anyone else. And also the nature of law enforcement/citizen encounters in this post 9/11 world. Excessive is the word.


I'm not a world citizen first... I'm an American citizen first. Our rights and responsibilities as defined by American laws in line with the US Constitution is all that matters to me. We're living in a time when the status of "American Citizen" has been devalued and is under fire from many different angles. The Gibson encounter with the feds is just one manifestation of a much broader situation in which the very underpinnings of our free society are being dismantled little by little.


The Constitution is the contract between the federal government, states and individuals (US citizens) that allows the federal government to have any authority at all. The Constitution grants that authority based on Constitutional provisions. Good causes aren't good enough reason to disregard the Constitution. No reason is good enough.

 

 

I consider myself as a citizen of the universe, and as such I very realistically expect that the little provincial self-important governments of the earth will not acknowledge any of my individual rights.

 

With this viewpoint do I view the situation: If you expect to have rights, you must be ready to fight and die for them at any instant. Anything less and you are nothing but a slave who is incapable of seeing his own chains.

 

But back to the topic: Just because Gibson makes fine instruments does not mean they are or are not ecologically ethical.

 

If the prior posts are true (stating that Gibson knowingly bought woods illegally), then the government will do what governments do: Seize your property, fine you, possibly imprison you.

 

If the prior posts are NOT true (stating that Gibson knowingly bought woods illegally), then the government will STILL do what governments do: Seize your property, fine you, possibly imprison you.

 

That is the function of government, and it's the only thing they're good at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

If the prior posts are true (stating that Gibson knowingly bought woods illegally), then the government will do what governments do: Seize your property, fine you, possibly imprison you.


If the prior posts are NOT true (stating that Gibson knowingly bought woods illegally), then the government will STILL do what governments do: Seize your property, fine you, possibly imprison you.

 

 

Read for yourself, this from the Settlement Report...

 

 

June 2008 Madagascar Trip



At the invitation of Greenpeace and other non-profit environmental groups, on June 9, 2008, a Gibson wood product specialist ("Gibson representative") flew to Madagascar for a "fact finding" trip with a group called the "Music Wood Coalition," spearheaded by Greenpeace. The trip was designed to assess the potential for supporting sustainable forestry in Madagascar. Part of the justification for the Gibson representative's participation in the trip was that the ebony species preferred for some of Gibson's instruments is found in Madagascar.


In connection with the trip, the Gibson representative received a translation of Madagascar Interministerial Order 16.030/2006, banning the harvest of ebony and the export of any ebony products that were not in finished form. The translation of the Order received by the Gibson representative stated that "fingerboards" are considered "finished" under Madagascar Law. Participants in the Music Wood Coalition trip to Madagascar, including the Gibson representative, were informed by trip organizers that, under the organizers' interpretation of the 2006 Interministerial Order, the harvest of ebony was illegal and that instrument part "blanks" would be considered "unfinished" and, therefore, considered illegal to export.


Following the trip, one of the trip organizers, produced a trip report that contained the following statements, among others:


a. "There are many legal issues pending on wood harvesting and export particularly with ebony and rosewood. It is currently illegal to harvest or export ebony."


b. "Currently, all wood products have to be in a final finished form before they can be exported. This issue would have to be addressed as instrument makers require wood blanks and pieces that can be further processed to desired dimensions. A possible export contract document that specified dimensions was suggested by the chief law enforcement officer that was traveling with us negotiated at the government level."


c. "It is currently illegal to harvest any species from natural forests until permitting has been resolved."


d. "Proving legality is a major problem and tracking woods from origin is even harder."


e. "There are at least two companies that have controlled the wood export for ebonies and rosewoods both of which sell to [T.N.] .... We visited [R.T.]'s ([T.N.] supplier) wood yard and he is obviously a main player in the market....His wood is under temporary seizure and cannot be moved."


The trip report, containing the above statements, was also attached to an email sent to the Gibson representative and Gibson's President. The Gibson representative forwarded an email, with the trip report attached, to a Gibson wood purchaser and others.

 

 

Following this trip, and the information shared with Gibson's President and purchasers, Gibson continued to place orders for and receive unfinished, illegal wood.

 

Beyond that, Gibson memos also showed how Gibson was able to take advantage of violence and political instability in Madagascar to acquire "ebony 'for the grey market,' referring to wood that was not documented to be the product of sustainable forestry practices."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

...If you expect to have rights, you must be ready to fight and die for them at any instant. Anything less and you are nothing but a slave who is incapable of seeing his own chains.

 

 

Yep, I couldn't agree more.

 

 


But back to the topic: Just because Gibson makes fine instruments does not mean they are or are not ecologically ethical.


If the prior posts are true (stating that Gibson knowingly bought woods illegally), then the government will do what governments do: Seize your property, fine you, possibly imprison you.


If the prior posts are NOT true (stating that Gibson knowingly bought woods illegally), then the government will STILL do what governments do: Seize your property, fine you, possibly imprison you.


That is the function of government, and it's the only thing they're good at.

 

 

My core issue is with the nature of the statutes and how they're enforced (Or more probably used for political purposes). This is runaway federal government at its worst. And since America, American ideals and my American citizenship mean something to me, I want to work to regain freedoms we've lost and preserve those we have.

 

It starts right here for me with local, state and federal government and our participation. If we don't participate in this, "Government of the people" then it will cease to be of the people. IMO voting is a minimum. I've always written to my representatives in government, and now with the ease of contacting them via Internet there's no excuse for us not to be more actively involved.

 

There's never been a time in our history when government didn't overstep its bounds, but we also have a history of people rising up and winning their freedoms back through the legal means of our system of representative government.

 

I just happened to see a program on TV today with people discussing the book,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

What the hell is wrong with you people? We have laws in place to not turn the entire planet into a stinking {censored}hole, and that's a BAD thing?

 

 

That's a good thing. Having laws in place that justify sending SWAT teams into a factory and intimidating innocent assembly line workers is a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...