Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miscellaneous [BG]' started by Williethump, Jun 20, 2019.
Doesn’t mean there won’t be another one.
this guy gets the big picture this is what myGibson wants and this is what the effect on all of us will be.
I know most guitar players in bass players especially the younger crowd hate corporate entities and I really do hope they go under now
Maybe 10-15 years from now, but not anytime soon. The folks in charge *will* get their ROI, regardless of how much whining on Internet forums and social media their actions bring. They are venture capitalists. They do NOT care, it's a part of their DNA.
Now, what will remain of Gibson that we once knew by the time they're done with it remains to be seen. There are so many possible different outcomes to this story that it's not even funny, and not all of them are good.
One thing that I'm certain of is that even if Gibson as a brand joins the likes of Cord and Duesenberg, it will NOT be due to the (vastly overblown IMO) outrage that is currently being spilled on various social media.
I agree. What we all say here doesn’t matter. What will matter is what the court(s) says/say.
Get ready for square shaped guitars. If Gibson can trademark a shape, then...
Even that may not work. If they then make a square guitar, then I suppose they could claim that too...
Bo Diddley :: Artists
yep! I was also thinking of this one:
Hamer, who I think made this one for him, need to get on the phone to their lawyers!
I think Bo Diddley's original rectangle guitar (which pre-dates Rick Nielsen's Hamer) was made by Gretsch, who patterned it after the homemade "cigar box" guitars Bo used to make when he was a kid learning to play.
If we follow one possible conclusion of what Gibson is up to, Gretsch could sue and win damages from anyone who makes a square or rectangle shaped body, and there have been a few companies that did.
This is part of the reason that, up to now, it has been really hard to get a body shape protected. Unlike a logo, or even the uniqueness of a headstock, a stringed instrument body is a fundamental part of a functional guitar, kind of like letters in the alphabet. Certain fundamental elements of most things just can't be "owned," like the wheel.
It's all about damage limitation, their cannibalism does take its toll, they now pay for them greed and gigantism.
In Switzerland one of the biggest former family goods retail trust (go MIGROS o. Gottlieb Duttweiler) tries to get rid of their measureless buys in the '80s and '90s, billion graves by now. This is beside other global odds kinda alarming ... very alarming!
Well, Pepsi was able to trademark "uh-huh", so why not square guitars?...
I wonder if Gibson has a trademark for the shape on the USA map guitars they made?
Or will they claim trademark on the shape of Texas, based on the guitar they made to Billy Gibbons.
(I doubt it, because even as a European I know that messing with is not something you try to do with Texas )
Are ANY of the possible outcomes good? Gibson is going after ownership of very basic body and headstock shapes. Let’s say they succeed. In that case, they’ll certainly have another go at PRS as well. Assuming they succeed again, they now own all single cut body shapes, all double cuts with pointy horns, all double cuts with rounded horns (“mouse ears”), all Vs and Explorer-like bodies, all 3x3 headstocks. Outside of Fender and Rickenbacker, the entire electric guitar market is subject to the whims of a company that hasn’t had a good innovation since before most people here were born. Okay, so you feel that anger over that potential is vastly overblown. Fine, that’s your opinion. Where is your own red line? Or do you have one? Is there some line Gibson could potentially cross that would anger you?
Personally I think we’re looking at either Gibson losing or the diminishment of the electric guitar to below the point where the market can be sustained.
This is the point so many are missing. I think because Gibson makes few basses, we assume it's not a big deal. If this works, others will try it as well and we will have few choices at high prices.
I really want to go get a Dean Cadillac now...
Well said. If Gibson wins all these and that stands up on appeal, they pretty much own the symetrical double cut market. Yamaha would be okay as their double cut horns are between the SG and the ES’s mouse ears - plus they have the money to utterly crush Gibson - but small builders would be limited to pure Fender rip-offs. Assuming Fender couldn’t come up with a way to take back their body styles using the Gibson case as precedent, of course. And with Gibson’s aggression toward content creators, young people wouldn’t even know that guitars don’t have to suck, it’s just that now they don’t have to not suck because three big corporations control all the supply and so don’t have to worry about someone making a better product.
Yep, and if this works for Gibson, look for Fender and Yamaha to jump in as well. There’s also little to stop big corporations from buying rights to long-gone brands and sueing for their trademarks as well. Troll market is troll market.
Now I’ve got to research the Dean Cadillac. I looked their web site and just found it confusing.
This has been mentioned, but: does Martin have the trademark / whatnot IP rights for the Dreadnought shape and/or X-bracing? Could they claim them with this case as a precedent, if it goes through with Gibson winning?
Maybe we should point out also that no matter how emotional this lawsuit is, it still to my understanding concerns (so far) only the US (and maybe Canada + Mexico, depending on NAFTA/it's new version). It might have implications elsewhere also, but the laws and interpretations are different.
Does anybody get a creepy Adam Curry vibe from this dou...whoops I mean dude? ???!?!?!???!!!????!?!?!??!!
Remember when Adam Curry was on MTV back in the day with his shoulder pads and coiffed 'do but 5 minutes later when Headbanger's Ball would start all he would do was put on a cheezy leather jacket to somehow seem "cool" yet it looked completely out of place and...dare I say...INAUTHENTIC???????
"Up next, it's Frankie Goes To Hollywood!"
"Up next, it's War Ensemble from Slayer!!"
"Up next, Dad bought a Hot Topic jacket!!"
Those of us using Dark Mode can’t read your post, @ScottsTheLimit . It’s black on black...
Edit: fixed now, thanks!
And thanks for the memories...
Even if they do win, the Chinese will still flood the market with clones. The law is only worth what is spent on enforcement, so legit companies will suffer, the Chinese will continue not to give a fiddler’s f**k about IP and copyright law. They can’t open EVERY container of the thousands coming in every day. Even if they could, would you rather see Customs chasing fake guitars, or fentanyl and black market weapons?
Under Gibson logic, Martin could file now and then sue for trademark counterfeiting.