Gibson confirms exclusive rights to trademarked guitar designs

[gearHed289]

Not a lot of info here, but figured Outposters would be interested.

http://www.mi-pro.co.uk/news/read/gibson-confirms-exclusive-rights-to-trademarked-guitar-designs-in-legal-dispute-with-jhs/022100

[Dave W]

Sounds to me like they had to sue John Hornby Skewes rather than just get them to stop by sending a cease and desist letter. Nothing new about Gibson asserting their trademark rights.

[dadagoboi]

Gisbo threatened to sue me for Thunderbird and Explorer trademark violation.  I took the stuff off my site.  Meanwhile, Lull and Dingwall are doing the same thing I was with no problems AFAIK.  We'll see what happens next.

Gisbo even demanded I stop using this ThunderBucker logo I built using Ford parts.

[TBird1958]

As I recall Mike Lull and several other builders were targeted by Gibson, it went to court, and they (Gibson) actually had no rights as at least at that point they hadn't copyrighted the shapes.   

[dadagoboi]

As I recall Mike Lull and several other builders were targeted by Gibson, it went to court, and they (Gibson) actually had no rights as at least at that point they hadn't copyrighted the shapes.

Gisbo contacted me around two years ago claiming rights.  I never answered, just removed stuff.  They sent me another letter a few months later saying they were dropping the matter...again, which I never answered.

The docs Gisbo sent me showed Reverse, NR, and Explorer shapes they were claiming trademark on as well as their Thunderbird logo.  After I scrubbed that stuff they came after the ThunderBucker logo.

Hamer has just been rebooted and their Standard would definitely be in violation of any Explorer copyright.


Of course, lawyers have been known to claim things that aren't actually true to get what they want...the law usually being   what the party with the deepest pockets says it is.

[TBird1958]

Gisbo contacted me around two years ago claiming rights.  I never answered, just removed stuff.  They sent me another letter a few months later saying they were dropping the matter...again, which I never answered.

The docs Gisbo sent me showed Reverse, NR, and Explorer shapes they were claiming trademark on as well as their Thunderbird logo.  After I scrubbed that stuff they came after the ThunderBucker logo.

Hamer has just been rebooted and their Standard would definitely be in violation of any Explorer copyright.


Of course, lawyers have been known to claim things that aren't actually true to get what they want...the law usually being   what the party with the deepest pockets says it is.

 I think your last sentence is right on the money (bad pun, sorry), Lull said that in court the judge told Gibson they didn't have a case since they weren't copyrighted.  I think they like to rattle the lawsuit Saber all the same. 

[Dave W]

This is all about trademarks. It has nothing to do with copyright.

At one time, Gibson had registered trademarks on most of its body shapes. If Lull is right, it's possible that someone managed to get those registered trademarks cancelled, possibly on the same grounds John Hornby Skewes tried to use in this case. But this case was in the UK and laws may be different. Cancellation could only have been done in a US court. Regardless, Gibson might still claim common law trademark and try to intimidate others who don't have deep pockets.

[4stringer77]

Hamer is back?

[Dave W]

Hamer is back?

Sort of. Fender sold off their KMC (Kaman) distribution business to a Canadian company called JAM. The Hamer name was included in the sale. Now KMC just introduced a half dozen of the old Hamer models. All imported. No idea if there will be basses or any US made models.

[TBird1958]

This is all about trademarks. It has nothing to do with copyright.

At one time, Gibson had registered trademarks on most of its body shapes. If Lull is right, it's possible that someone managed to get those registered trademarks cancelled, possibly on the same grounds John Hornby Skewes tried to use in this case. But this case was in the UK and laws may be different. Cancellation could only have been done in a US court. Regardless, Gibson might still claim common law trademark and try to intimidate others who don't have deep pockets.

 I don't know the specifics of it, but when Mike wanted to start making his Thunderbirds I asked him if Gibson wouldn't shut him down - The short answer was that they couldn't do a thing about it, obviously since he's still making Thunderbirds.

[BTL]

My personal experience with Leo's old company is that taking the fight to court is expensive, even with an attorney willing to bill his own hours pro bono.

Getting a registered USPTO trademark canceled on the grounds that it is generic is no easy task, and the burden is entirely on the plaintiff.

Even after the trademark is canceled, you can still be sued.

More reading here:

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/invalidate-trademark-691494.html

[Dave W]

My personal experience with Leo's old company is that taking the fight to court is expensive, even with an attorney willing to bill his own hours pro bono.

Getting a registered USPTO trademark canceled on the grounds that it is generic is no easy task, and the burden is entirely on the plaintiff.

Even after the trademark is canceled, you can still be sued.

More reading here:

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/invalidate-trademark-691494.html

Fender did register trademarks on the Strat, Tele and Jazz Bass back in 2004. They were cancelled by TTAB after a coalition of 15 to 20 companies opposed the registration. But it took five years and plenty of money.

I don't know the situation with Lull or whether Gibson's trademarks have been invalidated in the US. I do know that they had the LP body shape trademarked at one time. They sued PRS for infringement over the PRS Singlecut. Gibson lost on appeal when the court ruled that PRS' design wasn't close enough to cause confusion, but the court didn't specifically invalidate the trademark. That was about 10 years ago, so things could have changed.

[BTL]

The 339 shape registration was being contested in 2014, and I'm too tired to check what's up this evening.

I suspect the case was won based on Gibson taking a a multi-pronged approach to JHS's infringements.

In my scenario, I had a number of F-branded pieces and parts I was selling off on my Reverb page along with a couple of Mighty Mite complete builds.

I also had a disclaimer on my website that may have been a bit too clever.

It was a perfect storm.