Rate My Custom Headstock Logo!

[BIG CHEETO]

Put it on the neck. That would be sweet.

 

[Rodent]

No, as others have stated, anyone can build a bass with the Fender headstock, as long as the neck is Fender licensed ...

receiving legal advice from an internet forum statistically comprised of ~30% high school kids vs. seeking legal advice from a bonafide trademark lawyer ... smart - NOT!

so you know your Fender license theory to be legally true based on what - because some anonymous posters on an internet forum said so? sounds like you have a solid case for when your day in court with FMIC comes, eh?


R

 

[MisterMagician]

+1 on the font

and

+1 on the logo wear

receiving legal advice from an internet forum statistically comprised of ~30% high school kids vs. seeking legal advice from a bonafide trademark lawyer ... smart - NOT!

so you know your Fender license theory to be legally true based on what - because some anonymous posters on an internet forum said so? sounds like you have a solid case for when your day in court with FMIC comes, eh?


R

You seem like a fun person at parties.

 

[DHowardAir]

+1 Yes, I really like it. And, I like the newer stain you mentioned. Also, I'd have toagree with moving BARELY to the right.

Good job.

 

[mongo2]

No, as others have stated, anyone can build a bass with the Fender headstock, as long as the neck is Fender licensed (like AllParts).

Brilliant.

 

[Tendollarcat]

Wow, some of you guys are so helpful and friendly I just feel all warm and fuzzy inside

Not only does Fender (or at least the Corporation that bought out Leo) seem to have rights to guard a design that is almost 60 years old on a discretionary basis, it appears it has a direct guiding influence on the outspoken opinions of TB'ers. Is there such a thing as a cult of Fender Fundamentalism? Fendermentalism perhaps? Rather than labour the point on this thoroughly flogged dead horse, I'd just like to say I like the headstock design If it can be legally applied it will look cool. If it can't, I'm sure the bass will play the same

In stating my opinion in a public forum, I would like to confirm that I am not a trademark lawyer. I did, however, just order a bass off Dan. He's been friendly and approachable and clearly cares about putting out a good product. Hows that - some positive feedback from a non-expert

 

[Tendollarcat]

And Mongo,

You keep editing your previous posts. Why? The one about copying designs being bogus is why I posted.

 

[Rodent]

legalities change when you migrate from a "hobbiest" building a bass or two for yourself and friends to being a legitimate and licensed for profit "business"

one of those significant changes is what you can no longer legally do - build and sell something that another entity (person, business, etc ...) has trademarked without their express permission. failure to recognize this has been the downfall of many people who had a good product to offer but failed to adhere to the confines of the law. a little research will uncover that many of the well known Fender clones were forced to modify their branding (headstocks, logos, etc ...) to conform to the law so that they could continue to offer their products for sale as a business

for those who build a bass or two for themselves or a friend, nobody really cares ... but the game is different for a business entity.


so I've said my peace here, and am moving on ... Dan is now fully aware that he should seek bonafide legal advice for his business to determine what is legal for him to do with respect to Fender's trademarked materials. should Fender come knocking, he'll get to learn the other side of selling a product that infringes upon another entity's trademark

all the best,

R

 

[mongo2]

And Mongo,

You keep editing your previous posts. Why? The one about copying designs being bogus is why I posted.

I felt it was overstating the obvious. Feel free to delete your response if it bothers you.

 

[jmain]

legalities change when you migrate from a "hobbiest" building a bass or two for yourself and friends to being a legitimate and licensed for profit "business"

one of those significant changes is what you can no longer legally do - build and sell something that another entity (person, business, etc ...) has trademarked without their express permission. failure to recognize this has been the downfall of many people who had a good product to offer but failed to adhere to the confines of the law. a little research will uncover that many of the well known Fender clones were forced to modify their branding (headstocks, logos, etc ...) to conform to the law so that they could continue to offer their products for sale as a business

for those who build a bass or two for themselves or a friend, nobody really cares ... but the game is different for a business entity.


so I've said my peace here, and am moving on ... Dan is now fully aware that he should seek bonafide legal advice for his business to determine what is legal for him to do with respect to Fender's trademarked materials. should Fender come knocking, he'll get to learn the other side of selling a product that infringes upon another entity's trademark

all the best,

R

And if you wanted to confine your research to this internet forum, there are threads on the subject. There's also a big thread on the trial that Fender lost on the body shapes. But the headstock shape is all theirs.

 

[THand]

Hey guys - Regarding the logo placement on the headstock front, I wonder why Fender hasn't come after Dave Certain for his logo?

I have no idea about Fender's legal dept, but I do like David's logo better than yours, no offense. But considering aesthetics (not legality, which I am not qualified to speak about) his just looks more in the spirit of a vintage instrument which he is copying where IMHO, yours looks more like a Tee-shirt sport logo to me. I do like the grunge fonts tho, just think it looks more like a sports logo than a musical instrument logo. The website address is out of place too, you may loose that domain one day, I'd keep the web address on a business card.

 

[bassgod76]

I understand that TBers are just trying to look out for Dan from Fender's legal sharks. It just sucks, because IMO, he has great takes on a familiar design.

Besides the legal ramifications, there are some on this forum who seem to have a beef with Dan. He takes Allparts and Warmoth stuff, assembles and finishes them, and sells them. Some TBers want this and don't have the mechanical know-how to make it happen. Because, he offers this-low cost "made to order" option, Dan is treated like some sort of outcast.

A lot of folks think Dan should render his logo on his own designed head stock. That’s nice, but 3,000,000 other bass builders do this. Dan’s “Nash-like” business model is cool in my book.

I’m not a fan of the faded logo, and the URL looks silly. However, I do like the logo.

 

[Dark Horse]

Hi Dan,
I think what Rodent is saying is "cover your @ss". Spending some money now to consult an attorney on trademarks and copyright could certainly save you a boatload of money later.
Of course you could forego all this by using a different headstock shape, though finding one that looks great can be quite a challenge.
You build what looks to be VERY nice stuff. Many of us here would be sad to see Fender coming down on you like the Hammer of God for something that is correctable now, early in the game.
Re: the logo itself, on the back of the stock -
I'm not in love with it. It is "ok", but kind of has that "guy who just searched through Free Fonts and found one" look. You might see if you can contact an artist from the local art school, of even talk to the local high school art teacher and see if he has any "exceptional" students that may want to take a crack at doing a logo for you. You could always do a "contest" as well.
Anyway, I think that it is good that you're taking the time now to do things right. You build too nice of stuff (and reasonably priced too) to get mired down in legal issues later.
Best of luck.

 

[Dark Horse]

I suck at this, but a couple (mostly bad) ideas -

 

[DavidCertain]

receiving legal advice from an internet forum statistically comprised of ~30% high school kids vs. seeking legal advice from a bonafide trademark lawyer ... smart - NOT!

so you know your Fender license theory to be legally true based on what - because some anonymous posters on an internet forum said so? sounds like you have a solid case for when your day in court with FMIC comes, eh?


R

+1

 

[Staccato]

Nice lettering, color, and style! FWIW, apply the lettering-such that the 'A' is further from the edge, and/or several millimeters to the right.

 

[Spinal Tapper]

Dan, I really like the decal (typeface you chose) on the back of the headstock - I'd ditch the web address though - it sort of dates the bass, and your basses can indeed be timeless. IMO of course.

It'd be neat to use a symbol instead of your name at the headstock too maybe? Like a family crest of some sort?

I haven't seen any builders do something like that - seems like everyone wants to put type only on their headstocks or nothing at all - I think they'd be cool with a specific graphic or animal or something instead - and maybe this could waive the legalities in your favor as well.

I really really like your work though, and I think you should keep it up! You seem like a stand-up guy.

I would definitely buy one of your basses over any other "fender style" builder out there (certain, nash, etc)

Good luck with your legalities, and try to do whatever you can not to change the headstock shape - to me the Fender style headstock is the perfect fit for these types of basses. A guy like me who can't afford a 63 P bass, could surely come close with one of those P's you have on your website for a serious fraction of the price! I'm loving that sonic blue! Best of luck to you.

Dave

 

[DavidCertain]

the editing posts feature here allows someone to talk some caca, get called on it, then they can edit their post and act like it never happened. i've seen this many times; it enables posters to be "slippery". then when they get called on that, they make up some excuse about spelling or redundancy. there should be a TB rule that you can only edit posts for spelling or grammar, not to delete information you wrote that is [proven not factual. the false information needs to remain so TB'ers can who does and who does not have credibility. profiles also show who's who on here, too.

Dan, I think you have a handsome logo. I'd like to play one of your basses some day.

 

[Photoman1969]

Boy howdy. Some people around here sure do have an axe to grind. :scowl:

 

[Spinal Tapper]

Boy howdy. Some people around here sure do have an axe to grind. :scowl:

LOL - I hope he wasn't referring to me - I simply made an edit in my post to adjust a grammer issue...but I can see people getting defensive already...