The Last Bass Outpost
Gear Discussion Forums => Gibson Basses => Topic started by: Dave W on June 17, 2019, 11:42:08 PM
-
Gibson issues threat to rival guitar builders: “You have been warned; we’re here to protect our iconic legacy”...Guitar giant pulls Mark Agnesi video after outcry (https://www.musicradar.com/news/gibson-issues-threat-to-rival-guitar-builders-you-have-been-warned-were-here-to-protect-our-iconic-legacy)
The video can be seen on Reddit, at least for now:
https://www.reddit.com/link/c1p9kc/video/zhucj5uxvx431/player
Companies send cease-and-desist letters alleging trademark infringement...privately. How stupid and tone deaf to you have to be to publicly post a heavy-handed threatening video like this? What a way to squander all the good will Gibson's new ownership has enjoyed!
Gibson does have trademarks on many of its body shapes, he's right about that. But shortly past the 2 minute mark, he says that any copy of the shapes he's mentioned is in fact a counterfeit. That's absolutely false, A copy may be infringing, but it's not a counterfeit unless it claims to be a Gibson.
Boneheaded move.
-
What I tell know is based on rumours, so no truth:
I know Warwick had a lot of lawsuits with Gibson, about the Stryker (Explorer) and Wolf Hoffman (V). I think they won most, but I believe some were/are still going on so the Stryker was/is not available and the V in some countries only.
Last NAMM the new Gibson boss went up to see the Warwick boss and people told me he said something like: 'Our products are so different, so forget the lawsuits and just make those guitars.'
-
That's real weird. He appears to be awkwardly uncomfortable in the video. Hard to say though.
Has anyone ever seen an actual 1960 SG? Thought they came out in '61? And I didn't know that Ted McCarty designed the Flying V.
-
The video wasn't quite as bad as I expected, and I could definitely see a lot of people buying into it. But yeah, the guy seemed like he wasn't sure of himself. The message is "OK", the delivery, awkward.
-
I noticed recently that Gibson added a page on their website with their Registered Trademarks.
https://www.gibson.com/Registered-Trademarks
The process to invalidate a registered Trademark is neither cheap nor easy.
As a practical matter, I have made design choices to ensure that my body designs will never be confused for another brand's, including body materials, neck attachment, forearm facet, heel contour, belly cut, pickup and control routs, hardware, finish choices, etc.
Still, the smaller and lower volume the builder, the more likely it is that they will comply with a cease and desist letter, even if the Trademark is not defensible or the design is clearly not infringing.
Related: Gibson sues Armadillo over guitar trademarks (https://www.trademarksandbrandsonline.com/news/gibson-sues-armadillo-over-guitar-trademarks-5462)
-
Those are clearly not his own words. He is reading it off the autocue as if he is held at gun point.
It's kinda sad that Gibson doesn't see that imitation is the best form of flattery.
Their slogan Only a Gibson is good enough kind of implies they need not worry about copies. So why this threat?
And, how many copies are there of the Precision bass and Jazz bass? A bazillion. I don't think it has hurt the success of the original Fenders one bit.
-
I heard the video is taken offline?
-
https://www.reddit.com/r/guitars/comments/c1p9kc/gibsons_play_authentic_video_they_pulled_off_of/
-
And another thing: your brand spokesman should look like one. Lose the Fonzie getup, Mark. That was outdated in real life by the time Happy Days first went on the air 45 years ago. What next? Will Gibson hire Suzi to be his Leather Tuscadero?
You normally never hear of cease-and-desist letters unless the recipient is stupid enough to make a public issue of it -- e.g., Kelton Swade, who dared Fender to sue him (they did, he lost). It's done quietly and stays that way if the issue is resolved. If it gets to the point of a lawsuit being filed, that's when you hear about it.
Proactively issuing a blanket threat to the general public is astonishingly stupid. Can you imagine, say, the corporate spokesman for Adidas or Nike making a video like this? Even an outspoken CEO wouldn't make a video like this.
-
"Director of Brand Experience"??? ;D
Boy, if that's not a new age f'ing job title, I don't know what is.
-
The Reddit link didn't open in Chrome for me, but it did open in Explorer/Edge.
-
Innovative...?
Can anyone point to anything truly, successfully, innovative, in the last few decades...?
One of the oldest expressions is, "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery..."
Reddit site opened in Chrome for me with no issues... UK.
-
To mention the iconic brand status during a NAMM interview is one thing, but making a video solely about that and threats on trademark infringement on top of it comes out being simply pompous.
-
Ironically, Trademarks have nothing to do with innovation or quality:
The essential function of a trademark is to exclusively identify the commercial source or origin of products or services, so a trademark, properly called, indicates source or serves as a badge of origin. In other words, trademarks serve to identify a particular business as the source of goods or services. The use of a trademark in this way is known as trademark use. [...] Trademark rights generally arise out of the use of, or to maintain exclusive rights over, that sign in relation to certain products or services, assuming there are no other trademark objections. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Fundamental_concepts)
Trademark rights accrue in the market over time, so it's never "too late" to assert protected status, and it's not uncommon for disused Trademarks to be reasserted as a brand is resurrected.
-
Whoever said there is no such thing as bad publicity (P.T. Barnum?) obviously never had the chance to see something like this.
-
Whoever said there is no such thing as bad publicity (P.T. Barnum?) obviously never had the chance to see something like this.
Right. It's being discussed at every forum I've checked, and the reaction is about 98% negative.
As Rob said, these weren't Mark's own words. It still reflects poorly on him. In the discussion at the Gear Page, it was pointed out that he had no problem hawking copies when he was at Norm's, so by doing this video, it shows he'll do anything for a paycheck.
https://youtu.be/ppaJJFJvdz8
-
Ironically, Trademarks have nothing to do with innovation or quality:
The essential function of a trademark is to exclusively identify the commercial source or origin of products or services, so a trademark, properly called, indicates source or serves as a badge of origin. In other words, trademarks serve to identify a particular business as the source of goods or services. The use of a trademark in this way is known as trademark use. [...] Trademark rights generally arise out of the use of, or to maintain exclusive rights over, that sign in relation to certain products or services, assuming there are no other trademark objections. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Fundamental_concepts)
True. Whoever wrote the script either doesn't understand that or is trying to bamboozle the public.
Trademark rights accrue in the market over time, so it's never "too late" to assert protected status, and it's not uncommon for disused Trademarks to be reasserted as a brand is resurrected.
It's also never too late to challenge the validity of a trademark. Ironically, by making a public issue of this when there are a lot of copies out there, Gibson may have left themselves open to an attempt to cancel their marks. It could happen.
-
Trademark litigation is complex, expensive, and often not a matter of public record.
Because of that, much of what we know about these cases is based on rumor and hearsay.
On occasion, you may see a press release from a law firm (https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/8-million-guitar-counterfeit-claim-dismissed-300348067.html), but learning the details of how these claims were argued and adjudicated can be quite a challenge.
-
.aaaaaaand bam.
https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-sues-dean-guitars-trademark-infringement/ (https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-sues-dean-guitars-trademark-infringement/)
-
.aaaaaaand bam.
https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-sues-dean-guitars-trademark-infringement/ (https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-sues-dean-guitars-trademark-infringement/)
Hey Steve good to see you posting even if it's about this mess.
There are only so may ways to get from the bridge to a tuner. So. . . if all headstocks were cut flat on top would Martin sue for damages?
Gibson needs to lose one of these cases in big way to slow this sort of harassment down.
-
It started.... strange
-
.aaaaaaand bam.
https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-sues-dean-guitars-trademark-infringement/ (https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-sues-dean-guitars-trademark-infringement/)
Well, Gibson is definitely giving it both barrels in that lawsuit.
-
Anyone who thought some guitars on the market were Gibsons but in fact were Deans raise your hands! Anyone? I guess if you thought you bought a Gibson while the headstock says Dean I'd say you're probably still clueless. And happy until maybe now when you've been enlightened.
-
Anyone who thought some guitars on the market were Gibsons but in fact were Deans raise your hands! Anyone? I guess if you thought you bought a Gibson while the headstock says Dean I'd say you're probably still clueless. And happy until maybe now when you've been enlightened.
Exactly! That's why the mention of counterfeiting in the video is so stupid. As the link in Brad's post above shows, Gibson lost a counterfeiting claim in 2016.
What bothers me is that this was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, a well-known judicial hellhole favoring plaintiffs. Hopefully Dean/Armadillo can get the venue changed since there's no legitimate reason to file it there except to game the system.
It looks like this was filed before the video came out. Now we know why the video was made.
Dean had making the models in question for about 20 years before Gibson got trademarks on their body shapes in the late 1990s. This would be a perfect opportunity for Dean and other companies to join together and petition for a cancellation of those trademarks.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/eWjBBcE.jpg)
-
(https://www.mylespaul.com/attachments/gibson-jpg.387842/)
-
Love the photo of the "authentic" headstock!
:toast:
-
Dean responds (https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-dean-guitars-armadillo-responds/)
They're going to try to invalidate Gibson's body shape trademarks. Good for them.
-
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
(NSFW language)
https://youtu.be/4aljGgg70Pg
-
Henning is a funny guy! German and funny. Rare...
-
Love the photo of the "authentic" headstock!
:toast:
-
" This might have legs
“Dean Guitars – together with a number of other guitar makers – have already initiated an opposition proceeding before the US Patent and Trademark Office in a collective industry effort to curb Gibson’s attempts to claim exclusive rights to this generic shape,” he says, referring to the ES-335 design.
-
Additional interesting reading, especially the dates of Gibson's trademark claims vs. the establishment of Dean's designs decades earlier...
https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-vs-dean-five-things-you-need-to-know/
-
Good read!
-
I wonder if Gibson contacted all of Dean's dealers or just those who also sell Gibson.
-
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
(NSFW language)
https://youtu.be/4aljGgg70Pg
I sent this to a friend who has always been pro-Gibson who thinks this video is pretty funny. For my part, though, I hardly know what to think. I now find out one of my Gibson basses I bought several years ago is actually a Dean. I thought all along that Dean on the headstock was kind of suspicious, however.
-
I sent this to a friend who has always been pro-Gibson who thinks this video is pretty funny. For my part, though, I hardly know what to think. I now find out one of my Gibson basses I bought several years ago is actually a Dean. I thought all along that Dean on the headstock was kind of suspicious, however.
Wasn't that Orville's brother?
-
Wasn't that Orville's brother?
;D ;D ;D
-
Hard to know where then phrase originated, but the closest early reference seems to be from Brendan Behan: "There's no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary."
Mark Agnesi's video proves that saying is wrong. A friend at TDPRI said it's the most alienating video he's ever seen, and I agree. It's already wiped out any goodwill the new ownership had been given. Nothing good will come of it from Gibson's standpoint.
Trademarks can be invalidated, and thanks to what happened with Fender, it's definitely possible with Gibson. In 2004, Fender was granted trademarks on the Tele, Strat and Precision body shapes, a group of about 20 smaller builders (ironically led by Stuart Spector) challenged the trademarks on the grounds that the shapes had become generic years earlier. In 2009, all three trademarks were cancelled by the Trademark Trial and Appeals Board (TTAB).
What's important about that ruling is that TTAB ruled that it was a precedent. Most of their decisions apply only to the case being considered, but since it was a precedent, that should make it much easier for Dean and its allies to win.
I'm just wondering if Gibson will respond at all to this giant pile of shit they've stepped in.
-
USPTO doesn't grant Trademark status, they just provide the database for registration.
The only way a Trademark can be established is in the market.
However, once established, it must be defended through the legal system or risk being becoming generic.
Gibson may be playing the long game here by methodically chipping away at each competitor one-by-one, but never taking it all the way to trial like they did with PRS or like FMIC did on the P/J/S/T body shapes.
Unless a Trademark registration is canceled, and if Gibson's cease and desist efforts are successful, it's possible that some the registered designs could endure as Trademarks for Gibson.
The 335 shape seems to be on shaky ground, but it will be interesting to see if some of the others get the same level of industry pushback.
-
Oscar Wilde's quote may have a bearing on the bad publicity stuff...
"The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about..."
A bit like all the excrement that has risen to the surface re music copyright and the fact that virtually nothing recorded has been "fully copywritten"... A lot of "watch this space" going on...
-
USPTO doesn't grant Trademark status, they just provide the database for registration.
The only way a Trademark can be established is in the market.
However, once established, it must be defended through the legal system or risk being becoming generic.
Gibson may be playing the long game here by methodically chipping away at each competitor one-by-one, but never taking it all the way to trial like they did with PRS or like FMIC did on the P/J/S/T body shapes.
Unless a Trademark registration is canceled, and if Gibson's cease and desist efforts are successful, it's possible that some the registered designs could endure as Trademarks for Gibson.
The 335 shape seems to be on shaky ground, but it will be interesting to see if some of the others get the same level of industry pushback.
Brad, I don't know where you got this information, but it's false. USPTO only registers trademarks, enforcement is up to the trademark holder, but once your application for trademark registration is approved, you are the legal owner of a registered trademark. It can be canceled by opposition appeal to TTAB, which is what happened with Fender. It can be ruled generic and invalid as a result of legal action in a federal court case. But unless that happens, it's presumed legal and valid. You can legally say that you own the registered trademark, which is what Gibson does (https://www.gibson.com/Registered-Trademarks).
Registering a trademark isn't just submitting an application. You have to undergo an approval process that involves a trademark examiner who researches it and can deny registration, make objections you have to overcome to his satisfaction, or approve it as submitted. If your registration application is granted, you own the trademark. No question about it. You don't have to establish it in the market, you only have to defend it.
-
Dave,
I'm going to back away from my previous comments...I'm not as confident as I once was in what I believed I knew.
:mrgreen:
-
It looks like the Flying-V may have a future as an aircraft.
https://simpleflying.com/flying-v-aircraft/
-
It looks like the Flying-V may have a future as an aircraft.
https://simpleflying.com/flying-v-aircraft/
they've been talking up the blended body design as the future of airliners since I was a kid in the 80s yet Boeing and Airbus still keep churning out traditional bodied new products. if it was as efficient and airworthy as they say, someone would have brought something to market by now
-
There are some interesting posts on the topic here:
http://ebassist.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=3532&page=5
This one in particular:
If Fender wanted to eliminate strat body shape copies tomorrow, they could.
Kindness is the principal in a firm that specializes in Intellectual Property law.
My perspective on all of this has definitely shifted.
-
they've been talking up the blended body design as the future of airliners since I was a kid in the 80s yet Boeing and Airbus still keep churning out traditional bodied new products. if it was as efficient and airworthy as they say, someone would have brought something to market by now
When asked when this would come out, the KLM CEO said 2050. But they are serious enough about it to give some money to Delft University of Technology to explore the concept.
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/company-news/video/klm-ceo-on-industry-risks-brand-fleet-flying-v-concept~1697684
-
They've had functional aircraft in that basic shape for years, but it seems to me that the tubular body design of conventional aircraft provides a lot more room for passengers and cargo, making better financial sense.
-
They've had functional aircraft in that basic shape for years, but it seems to me that the tubular body design of conventional aircraft provides a lot more room for passengers and cargo, making better financial sense.
no thats the USP of the blended wing design, by making the whole body be the wing (lifting surface) you can fit payload in the whole aircraft, doubling or tripling capacity.
I think that 1/2 of the passengers not being able to see a window might be a factor, the last piece I read on it was talking about using screens and cameras to give passengers in the middle a virtual window. that shouldnt be an impediment to cargo tho
-
Getting back to Gibson, I don't much keep up with guitar stuff. So I don't even know who this guy is. But he makes a few observations about the Gibson PR fiasco. He refers to it as a "chuff up." A term I've never heard before, but now I've learned some British slang.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h67awpfHDk
-
Dave,
I'm going to back away from my previous comments...I'm not as confident as I once was in what I believed I knew.
:mrgreen:
No problem, it's just a friendly discussion.
I do want to quote from USPTO's Basic Facts About Trademarks (https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/BasicFacts.pdf) (pdf)
"...owning a federal trademark registration on the Principal Register provides a number of significant advantages over common law rights alone,
including:
• A legal presumption of your ownership of the mark and your exclusive right to use the mark
nationwide on or in connection with the goods/services listed in the registration..."
There are some interesting posts on the topic here:
http://ebassist.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=3532&page=5
This one in particular:
Quote from: Kindness
If Fender wanted to eliminate strat body shape copies tomorrow, they could.
Kindness is the principal in a firm that specializes in Intellectual Property law.
My perspective on all of this has definitely shifted.
I can't see the posts without signing up for membership, but Kindness is dead wrong. As I mentioned I post #38, Fender's three body shape trademarks were all cancelled by TTAB in 2009 in a precedent-setting decision. Fender can't do jack shit about Strat copies as long as the headstock is different and doesn't say Fender. Send him this (http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91161403&pty=OPP&eno=246)
-
Another slam at Gibson.
https://youtu.be/kd1LuLYlyrM
-
[...] Kindness is dead wrong. [...]
[Fender has] found what they believe to be the most market friendly level of copying. But if they really wanted to start reclaiming exclusivity, they have a path to do so (at great expense).
I suspect he has knowledge of the "path to do so", either directly or in having pursued a similar strategy for a client.
Regardless, I have known him for more than a decade, and he doesn't make statements like these lightly.
-
Finally, a solution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AT2Jw0rTxwA
-
Here's a little more from Kindness on the Fender body shapes:
If Fender wanted to reassert itself, it could. It would start by attacking the small makers, piling up settlement agreements demonstrating its enforcement. It could successively outspend more competitors, clear the tables, and reclaim the marks. It would take a lot of time and money, but it is possible.
As we have seen in Gibson's case, there would be potential blowback if Fender followed this path, but this road is open to them at any time.
-
I wonder if Gibson realises that Slash used a copy Les Paul back in the heyday of GnR?
It was that very copy that helped pull the Gibson Les Paul out of the swamps...
-
Here's a little more from Kindness on the Fender body shapes:
Quote from: Kindness
If Fender wanted to reassert itself, it could. It would start by attacking the small makers, piling up settlement agreements demonstrating its enforcement. It could successively outspend more competitors, clear the tables, and reclaim the marks. It would take a lot of time and money, but it is possible.
As we have seen in Gibson's case, there would be potential blowback if Fender followed this path, but this road is open to them at any time.
No, they can't reclaim the marks, because they never had the marks to begin with. They applied in 2003, and in 2004 the USPTO published for opposition, which means that the trademarks will be approved if there are no objections within the 30 day opposition period. But there was opposition, from the consortium of builders, and after 5 years, the TTAB denied registration to Fender. It's all there in the top section of the file I linked to earlier.
There's nothing for Fender to reclaim. TTAB's decisions can be appealed in federal court, but the deadline for that was 10 years ago, and since then, the Supreme Court has ruled that TTAB's decisions in likelihood of confusion cases can't be overturned.
He's wrong.
-
[...] He's wrong.
That's certainly possible, and I admit I was caught off guard by his perspective on the issue.
-
So Gibson openend a website now, so people can report fakes?
-
So Gibson openend a website now, so people can report fakes?
No, it's a page on their website that's been there for several years now. Nothing new about that.
The problem (IMHO) is that Gibson is now claiming that any Gibson shape made by anyone else is a counterfeit. That's just not true. If it doesn't claim to be a Gibson, it's not counterfeit,
-
In the meanwhile reverend have taken all their Volcano guitars offline.
Most likely because of the threats of a certain company...
(https://assets-global.website-files.com/586b4b53ca144c082c2ce7a8/5a4d2777db70410001304a69_volhb_NAT_main.png)
-
No, it's a page on their website that's been there for several years now. Nothing new about that.
The problem (IMHO) is that Gibson is now claiming that any Gibson shape made by anyone else is a counterfeit. That's just not true. If it doesn't claim to be a Gibson, it's not counterfeit,
If the body shape is a source identifier, then a copy is a counterfeit. (https://www.upcounsel.com/trademark-counterfeiting)
-
If the body shape is a source identifier, then a copy is a counterfeit. (https://www.upcounsel.com/trademark-counterfeiting)
That's an oversimplification.
That's what Gibson claimed in its lawsuit against JHS, who owns the Vintage brand. Guess what? Gibson lost. (http://mmrmagazine.com/mmr-global/victory-for-jhs-in-gibson-counterfeiting-case/) The article is worth reading b/c the decision explains why it's not a counterfeit.
A trademark owner has to show likelihood of confusion. Dean might be found to infringe on Gibson's body shape trademarks, but the Dean name on a different shape headstock is not going to confuse anyone into thinking that they're buying a Gibson. It's not counterfeiting.
As far as I'm concerned, that claim is so obnoxious and so far over-the-top that I hope Gibson's new ownership fails. It's outrageous. If I buy any more Gibsons, they will be used.
-
That's an oversimplification.
Perhaps, but it's also the legal term of art (https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1709-joint-statement-parts-c-and-d-definitions-trafficking-counterfeit)used when prosecuting disputes related to registered Trademarks.
-
Perhaps, but it's also the legal term of art (https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1709-joint-statement-parts-c-and-d-definitions-trafficking-counterfeit)used when prosecuting disputes related to registered Trademarks.
There's no perhaps about it. It's a two paragraph summary.
Yes, it's a legal term, but there's nothing in your latest link that would apply in this case. Look at the fourth and fifth paragraphs of section D. None of Dean's instruments are remotely "likely to cause confusion" and certainly aren't "identical or substantially identical" with their clearly different brand name and headstock shape.
I accept that companies will try to maintain their trademarks, even though I'd like to see "trade dress" marks abolished. This is way beyond that. The video with Agnesi coming across like a Mafioso thug was bad enough, but accusations of trademark counterfeiting are just damned lies. To hell with them.
-
It is ludicrous to suggest that anyone could get a Dean and Gibson mixed up.
-
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
(https://i.imgflip.com/34eswo.jpg)
-
Yes, it's a legal term, but there's nothing in your latest link that would apply in this case.
If the body shape (outline) is the registered mark, then using that mark in the class of goods where it's registered is Trademark Counterfeiting. (https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1715-trademark-counterfeiting-requirements-counterfeit-mark)
That's the foundation of the argument, and the source of the term "authentic".
Whether or not the courts side with Gibson on all of its registered marks remains to be seen.
The issue of likelihood of confusion, mistake, or deception, is a question of fact for the jury.
It seems as though the 335 shape has faced the greatest opposition, so it will be interesting to see how things proceed with the other registered marks.
-
If the body shape (outline) is the registered mark, then using that mark in the class of goods where it's registered is Trademark Counterfeiting. (https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1715-trademark-counterfeiting-requirements-counterfeit-mark)
That's the foundation of the argument, and the source of the term "authentic".
Whether or not the courts side with Gibson on all of its registered marks remains to be seen.
Again, "likely to cause confusion, to cause the mistake, or to deceive." That manual doesn't address a situation where one product has two or more separate trademarks. Dean's headstock shape and brand name will never be confused with Gibson's trademarked headstock shape, brand name, and logo.
Gibson already tried this in their suit against JHS. They lost because JHS' guitars had a different headstock with a different brand name.
Nobody knows what will happen in court, but if Dean doesn't cave, I'm confident they'll win on appeal. I also think there's a good chance that a consortium of companies can get Gibson's body shape marks cancelled.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/B4AK4Ih.jpg)
-
Here's a short one, from Trogly of all people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hST9sBUw9qk
-
This one is actually somewhat long at 13 minutes. But he may make some valid points. Although he makes it clear he doesn't like Dean, at the same time he points out that there may be some unintended consequences of Gibson making itself less desirable while it validates Dean.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnV99ATgdKE
-
Listen genuine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YCvTF6vKfc
-
They just lost in Europe.
https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/?fbclid=IwAR0qcG042dV9FaM1TFUW7QzXJqN5ZquturMtGFq9EQf6vLtdcGVP5AgYqqk (https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/?fbclid=IwAR0qcG042dV9FaM1TFUW7QzXJqN5ZquturMtGFq9EQf6vLtdcGVP5AgYqqk)
-
They just lost in Europe.
https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/?fbclid=IwAR0qcG042dV9FaM1TFUW7QzXJqN5ZquturMtGFq9EQf6vLtdcGVP5AgYqqk (https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/?fbclid=IwAR0qcG042dV9FaM1TFUW7QzXJqN5ZquturMtGFq9EQf6vLtdcGVP5AgYqqk)
No surprise there...
-
[...] Nobody knows what will happen in court, but if Dean doesn't cave, I'm confident they'll win on appeal. I also think there's a good chance that a consortium of companies can get Gibson's body shape marks cancelled.
It will be a very interesting story to follow, even more so for me because I will have a Thunderluxe bass on display at Summer NAMM.
Maybe that's a special kind of stupid, too.
:mrgreen:
-
They just lost in Europe.
https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/?fbclid=IwAR0qcG042dV9FaM1TFUW7QzXJqN5ZquturMtGFq9EQf6vLtdcGVP5AgYqqk (https://guitar.com/news/gibson-loses-flying-v-trademark-case-in-eu-court/?fbclid=IwAR0qcG042dV9FaM1TFUW7QzXJqN5ZquturMtGFq9EQf6vLtdcGVP5AgYqqk)
Excellent news, IMHO.And by Hans-Peter Wilfer, who was harassed for years by hypocrite Stuart Spector. Good for him!
Hard to say if this will affect the Gibson's lawsuit against Dean, but it may help Dean and their partners in getting it cancelled in the US.
-
Listen genuine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YCvTF6vKfc
That's brilliant and hilarious.
I love the changing camera angles. Also the trademark on beards. ;D
-
That's brilliant and hilarious.
I love the changing camera angles. Also the trademark on beards. ;D
Yes, I'd say they hit a satirical home run on that one. ;D
-
Hans-Peter Wilfer is a friend of mine. I know he's busy with those law suits for years, as I wrote earlier. His V was only for sale in some countries, but now he won.
I asked him about that rumour I wrote here before: that JC came up to the Warwick/Framus booth saying something like: 'don't worry about those body shapes and copyright...'
I asked HP and he answered shortly to me: 'He lied to me'
-
From confrontation to collaboration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0t1dec5jyA
-
I wonder if "collaboration" means licensing agreements and fees on the Trademarked body shapes.
-
Here's the story (https://myemail.constantcontact.com/Gibson-Pivots-From-Confrontation-To-Collaboration.html?soid=1129474305186&aid=e5n9UgqBZls) he was quoting. It's a press release, nothing more.
I'll believe that Gibson has learned their lesson if they drop the suit against Dean.
-
In "discussing" Gibson vs. Dean, you need to be wearing a tin foil hat when he gets to conspiracy theory #5 starting at 5:20. ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWpag0z_MGY
-
In "discussing" Gibson vs. Dean, you need to be wearing a tin foil hat when he gets to conspiracy theory #5 starting at 5:20. ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWpag0z_MGY
Mesotopian? ;D ;D ;D
-
Mesotopian? ;D ;D ;D
A hybrid of Mesopotamian and Utopian. :)
-
Or dystopian. ;D
That video must be some sort of performance art.
If Gibson really thought there's no such thing as bad press, they don't think so any more.
Agnesi is back with a new video, as if nothing has happened. He still doesn't come across well.
I'm not impressed with the guitar. I love walnut, but not as a fingerboard wood, and locally sourced probably means it's one of the softer western walnuts.
https://youtu.be/GY5TjQtwBTo
-
Dystopian would be more accurate in most cases since utopias don't exist. But the conspiracy thing is meaningless anyway. As a sci-fi fan, I found it entertaining the way he linked points that had no real connection to each other. It made the absurdity of it all even funnier. It seems he mostly does gear reviews, but decided to branch out and do something different for one video. A good job, IMO and the levity was welcomed. He did another video on finding your inner rock star which I also thought was pretty good, but it has little to do with this particular topic.
-
Commentary on Gibson's alleged shift in policy.
Gibson Guitar Declares Shift In IP Enforcement After Most Recent Public Backlash (https://abovethelaw.com/2019/07/gibson-guitar-declares-shift-in-ip-enforcement-after-most-recent-public-backlash/?rf=1)
-
This tweet is from 30 seconds ago. Agnesi still uses the #PlayAuthentic hashtag.
https://twitter.com/markagnesi/status/1148626394915725313?s=21
-
I'll believe that Gibson has learned their lesson if they drop the suit against Dean.
I wonder if we'll hear anything more on the Dean matter if it does not go to trial.
I suspect the answer is no.
-
This is a follow-up video to one I posted earlier. Whether it's worth spending 46 minutes on I really can't say. I think that would vary from one person to another. Personally I found it a little dry, but others may have a different opinion, especially if they are really interested in the Gibson/Dean topic and want to soak up all available info.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxdGMjf76s4
-
This tweet is from 30 seconds ago. Agnesi still uses the #PlayAuthentic hashtag.
https://twitter.com/markagnesi/status/1148626394915725313?s=21
How lame is that! Now the guy who used to demo copies from Norm's and talk about how good they were is suddenly all about the originals. I do agree with him about Fender but he's such a hypocrite!
What about this? Guess it isn't "authentic". :mrgreen:
(https://images.reverb.com/image/upload/s--eK0HAoHb--/a_exif,c_limit,e_unsharp_mask:80,f_auto,fl_progressive,g_south,h_620,q_90,w_620/v1473979985/qbxasjxlnumfffsxuhcf.jpg)
-
(https://images.reverb.com/image/upload/s--eK0HAoHb--/a_exif,c_limit,e_unsharp_mask:80,f_auto,fl_progressive,g_south,h_620,q_90,w_620/v1473979985/qbxasjxlnumfffsxuhcf.jpg)
Wow, the elusive "Telephone"! :mrgreen:
-
The plot thickens.
https://www.musicradar.com/news/gibson-threatened-dealers-with-legal-action-unless-they-stopped-selling-dean-guitars-alleges-dean
-
The plot thickens.
https://www.musicradar.com/news/gibson-threatened-dealers-with-legal-action-unless-they-stopped-selling-dean-guitars-alleges-dean
Rat bastids. >:( I hope Armadillo takes them to the cleaners.
-
Armadillo fires back. (https://guitar.com/news/dean-seeks-trademark-cancellation-against-gibson-alleges-dealer-interference/)
-
Wow, the elusive "Telephone"! :mrgreen:
;D ;D ;D
-
Another very interesting story:
IS THE ES-335 TRADEMARK FIGHT GIBSON’S BIGGEST LEGAL BATTLE YET? (https://guitar.com/features/opinion-analysis/gibson-es-335-trademark-legal-battle/)
I didn't realize this action was in process. It's good for the opposition that their lead attorney is the same one who led the successful opposition to Fender. And he's a bassist!
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8o0YnT476A4
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8o0YnT476A4
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Excellent!
-
https://youtu.be/XqEaMkWJnv8
-
Not for nothing...
The only thing that's as pathetic as Agnesi right now is a bunch of nobodies likely living in their parents' basements creating clickbait all over YT and providing their unending wisdom on Gibson vs. Dean et al...
-
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Excellent!
It was the part about Gretsch which cracked me up the most. I looked at some of his other videos. It seems this particular video was posted on Canada Day--a time obviously to relax. All the other videos seem fairly serious. I was curious what his attitude had been toward Gibson guitars. It seems he has liked Gibson much of his life, but in recent years--like others--has become concerned about quality control, etc. Some of his videos have over 500,000 views. That's nothing to sneeze at in terms of how much money you're making just for posting You Tube videos.
-
Another very interesting story:
IS THE ES-335 TRADEMARK FIGHT GIBSON’S BIGGEST LEGAL BATTLE YET? (https://guitar.com/features/opinion-analysis/gibson-es-335-trademark-legal-battle/)
I didn't realize this action was in process. It's good for the opposition that their lead attorney is the same one who led the successful opposition to Fender. And he's a bassist!
Ronald Bienstock was on point for the JHS action as well.
I believe the counterclaim that remains pending (https://scarincihollenbeck.com/firm-news/congratulations/guitar-counterfeiting-claim-dismissed/) is related to the 335 body shape.
It's interesting that all of these articles and opinion pieces can be tied back to the same two or three bits of primary source information.
-
It's interesting that all of these articles and opinion pieces can be tied back to the same two or three bits of primary source information.
I guess that's what the Youtubers do. They never do any work themselves, but rather use an article to comment on. In this case there are articles about the lawsuits themselves so those articles are pretty much the same and then come the Youtubers.
-
I guess that's what the Youtubers do. They never do any work themselves, but rather use an article to comment on.
If most of them were actually capable of performing any meaningful work they wouldn't attempting to make a living posting rants on YT. Yeah I know I sound like a grouchy old man, but this is one of the things in the current society that bugs the living daylight out of me.
-
If most of them were actually capable of performing any meaningful work they wouldn't attempting to make a living posting rants on YT. Yeah I know I sound like a grouchy old man, but this is one of the things in the current society that bugs the living daylight out of me.
It's not just about Gibson or musical instruments. Seems like as much as half of YT is now commentary. Sure, plenty of them don't know what they're talking about, but that was true of people long before the internet existed.
I'd rather have it this way. YT gives more people the opportunity to be heard.
-
(http://www.celebquote.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/522927_10150847590372019_1146329041_n.jpg)
-
There are only two channels that I go to in which the You Tubers are full-time. One is a woman somewhere in New York state. She is a caregiver for her husband who had a serious accident. I go because she offers very useful, practical advice--like how to honor the wishes of people around you who are innocent and cheerful at Christmas while you are basically more like Scrooge. The other channel is run by a guy who quit his regular job to make a sci-fi channel. This may have been a mistake for him, but the channel is great for sci-fi fans.
This video is not from either of those two people. It's just something I randomly stumbled across a few days ago. This You Tuber gives an insider's view. Obviously, she is making some money at it. But says that most people on YT aren't doing it full-time and she doesn't recommend that someone even try to do it full-time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=do1VLjNg6AE
-
I'll just put this here because it's so authentic on more than one level.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTNv9i6Mq2w
-
Sorry, as soon as I heard Trogly's voice, I stopped. Even if he has something good to say, I can't stand the sound of his voice, and he beats every subject to death.
-
I'll just put this here because it's so authentic on more than one level.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTNv9i6Mq2w
Just by looking at that video, to me this appears to be something the Hendrix estate itself was involved in more than Gibson itself. They target people who tend to be avid collectors, although sometimes there are musicians, too. The well started running dry quite some time ago with the previously unreleased recordings. But for a while there some of those were pretty good. By the way, I love the way part of the video ended up having to be muted because of a copyright claim. LOL.
-
https://www.musicradar.com/news/summer-namm-2019-gibson-reveals-collaborations-with-boutique-guitar-builders-as-it-launches-authorized-partnership-program
-
https://www.musicradar.com/news/summer-namm-2019-gibson-reveals-collaborations-with-boutique-guitar-builders-as-it-launches-authorized-partnership-program
I'm not surprised that they have intimidated a few boutique builders into some kind of a deal.
"...it’s more acknowledgment that these are some shapes that we’ve created.” There's no doubt that Gibson was first to create some of its shapes. There's much more to trademark than that, but I won't get into that here. “And then that centre point are some brands that just knowingly sort of take advantage of the shapes that you’ve created, and because they’ve been using them for a long time they think they’re theirs.” No, Dean and companies like them don't think they created shapes that you did; they do understand what's protectable and what's not, and if they don't cave, I believe they'll win over Gibson.
-
I'm not surprised that they have intimidated a few boutique builders into some kind of a deal.
"...it’s more acknowledgment that these are some shapes that we’ve created.” There's no doubt that Gibson was first to create some of its shapes. There's much more to trademark than that, but I won't get into that here. “And then that centre point are some brands that just knowingly sort of take advantage of the shapes that you’ve created, and because they’ve been using them for a long time they think they’re theirs.” No, Dean and companies like them don't think they created shapes that you did; they do understand what's protectable and what's not, and if they don't cave, I believe they'll win over Gibson.
It has reached the point that I'm not surprised at much of anything anymore. I've liked Gibson even since I was a teenager. I still like them. But in this particular case I look at Dean as the underdog and hope they come out ahead. Whatever the financial aspects of this turn out to be, there have been plenty of Gibson critics vocal and vehement through the years. Many times Gibson's critics have got on my nerves big time. But I think in this case it's Gibson itself that's making its public image look awful.
-
No matter what JC says, Gibson's public image has taken a major hit. Considering the goodwill they had after bringing the company out of Chapter 11, it was a colossal blunder, and I don't see it getting better.
It hasn't changed my love for Gibsons, though, and there are plenty of used Gibsons out there.
-
No matter what JC says, Gibson's public image has taken a major hit. Considering the goodwill they had after bringing the company out of Chapter 11, it was a colossal blunder, and I don't see it getting better.
It hasn't changed my love for Gibsons, though, and there are plenty of used Gibsons out there.
Gibson has always had a unique flair. Many examples could be used. But Jack Bruce coming out on stage in 2005 with his EB-1 was quite a thrill to me. Probably no other bass would have had quite the same effect on me. It was even better than coming out on stage with an EB-3 again, although that would have worked, too. But that's why it bothers me that a brand I've always liked would purposely get itself in such a situation as this one. It certainly won't affect me personally, though. If I see a Gibson I want, I'll buy it--new or used.
-
No matter what JC says, Gibson's public image has taken a major hit.
Yes. For example I don't think the lawsuit would have gained near that much attention if it was'nt for the Play Authentic video coming out prior to that. What annoys me most about that video is it comes out as if they are patting the palm on top of consumers heads. They would'nt have had any problem in using the term Play Authentic as a marketing slogan though. Gibson has always had their fanbase who will say the only LP-, Explorer- or V-shape to play is Gibson. The video OTOH seemed directed to the whole world as a universal truth. Free thinking musicians don't need anyone telling them they don't play authentic guitars unless shape and brand name match accordingy. I'm not sure JC has realised the magnitude of the bad PR they've created.
-
Yes. For example I don't think the lawsuit would have gained near that much attention if it was'nt for the Play Authentic video coming out prior to that. What annoys me most about that video is it comes out as if they are patting the palm on top of consumers heads. They would'nt have had any problem in using the term Play Authentic as a marketing slogan though. Gibson has always had their fanbase who will say the only LP-, Explorer- or V-shape to play is Gibson. The video OTOH seemed directed to the whole world as a universal truth. Free thinking musicians don't need anyone telling them they don't play authentic guitars unless shape and brand name match accordingy. I'm not sure JC has realised the magnitude of the bad PR they've created.
I agree. He doesn't understand it. He says that lessons have been learned but I doubt it, especially not with the latest news about Gibson trying to intimidate Dean retailers.
It will probably be a while before we know the full effect of the backlash.
-
Dingwall seems to have had some issues too. Apologies if someone else has posted about this. I couldn't see it in my skim of the 8 pages.
"To all our friends and customers,
Due to circumstances beyond our control we are discontinuing the award-winning D-bird model. In it’s place we are introducing the D-Roc. The good news is that all the performance features that made the D-bird such a standout will be carried over to the D-Roc, the only changes will be to the body profile and headstock. Early feedback to the new D-Roc has been unanimously positive so we see this as a very positive move. Customers receiving a D-Roc will be getting the first run of a new and exciting design. We appreciate everyone’s patience and support as we faced this challenge to steer things to a successful and positive outcome for our customers. We are very proud of the efforts of the entire Dingwall team and suppliers.
Best regards,
Sheldon Dingwall"
Apparently there were other posts from Mr Dingwall that referenced nasty letters from Gibson, which I can't find now.
D- Roc
(https://dingwallguitars.com/images/2019/07/08/d-rock-5-3x-matte-gold-wenge-wenge-fretboard-headstock-pickguard-series-main-photo.jpg)
D Bird
(http://cdn3.volusion.com/nvcpd.gmazx/v/vspfiles/photos/DINGWALLDBIRDMETFLAKE-2T.png)
-
Dingwall seems to have had some issues too. Apologies if someone else has posted about this. I couldn't see it in my skim of the 8 pages.
"To all our friends and customers,
Due to circumstances beyond our control we are discontinuing the award-winning D-bird model. In it’s place we are introducing the D-Roc. The good news is that all the performance features that made the D-bird such a standout will be carried over to the D-Roc, the only changes will be to the body profile and headstock. Early feedback to the new D-Roc has been unanimously positive so we see this as a very positive move. Customers receiving a D-Roc will be getting the first run of a new and exciting design. We appreciate everyone’s patience and support as we faced this challenge to steer things to a successful and positive outcome for our customers. We are very proud of the efforts of the entire Dingwall team and suppliers.
Best regards,
Sheldon Dingwall"
Apparently there were other posts from Mr Dingwall that referenced nasty letters from Gibson, which I can't find now.
D- Roc
(https://dingwallguitars.com/images/2019/07/08/d-rock-5-3x-matte-gold-wenge-wenge-fretboard-headstock-pickguard-series-main-photo.jpg)
D Bird
(http://cdn3.volusion.com/nvcpd.gmazx/v/vspfiles/photos/DINGWALLDBIRDMETFLAKE-2T.png)
Why can't Dingwall still use the D-Bird name? Has Gibson trademarked the word bird (watch out Audubon Society)?
-
Why can't Dingwall still use the D-Bird name? Does Gibson own a trademark on the word bird (watch out Audubon Society)?
-
Gibson's legal team obviously thought it was too close to Thunderbird. The trademark is for the category of musical instruments, not just any product. It's more overreach. No one would have confused the product shapes, either. The fanned frets and the slanted features set the Dingwall apart. But a small operator like Sheldon doesn't have the resources to fight it. That's a shame.
-
If Gibson succeeds in stopping or slowing down Dean, I think it's more likely people who would have become Dean customers will turn to a company like ESP which already has a metal image. It may hurt Dean, but it most likely won't particularly help Gibson. Not to mention the PR damage being done to Gibson which now seems almost never ending. Of course this may be just stating the obvious.
-
That Snapchat aging filter has claimed another victim. :mrgreen:
(https://i.imgur.com/jI8xX1L.jpg)
-
Say what you will about Mark Agnesi, he would never demo an '87 American Standard Strat as Guitar of the Day at Norm's.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AypoDxSxlXo
-
How lame is that! Norm must be running out of rare guitars.
-
How lame is that! Norm must be running out of rare guitars.
Mr. Agnesi must have paid them a visit and instructed them to dispose of all their lawsuit-era instruments... :mrgreen:
-
Gibson's legal team obviously thought it was too close to Thunderbird. The trademark is for the category of musical instruments, not just any product. It's more overreach. No one would have confused the product shapes, either. The fanned frets and the slanted features set the Dingwall apart. But a small operator like Sheldon doesn't have the resources to fight it. That's a shame.
I like the new D-Roc better anyway. The T-Bird body looked really oversized on the 4 stringers. The new body looks more in keeping with Dingwall's overall aesthetic to me.
...and speaking of missing the point (https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-returns-tom-oberheim-trademark/?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=).
-
...and speaking of missing the point (https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-returns-tom-oberheim-trademark/?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=).
Well that IS nice. 8)
-
It seems that Gibson is following the playbook my friend outlined to a "T":
It’s essentially an agreement where they acknowledge: ‘Yup, these are your shapes,’ and we say, ‘you can use them.'”
This is how Gibson is positioning itself for a win against Dean.
-
...
...and speaking of missing the point (https://guitar.com/news/industry-news/gibson-returns-tom-oberheim-trademark/?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=).
Almost meaningless gesture intended to counteract the bad PR. It's nice, but Mr. Oberheim obviously didn't need to get it back.
No, JC, I'm not impressed.
-
Detroit-based Echopark Guitars signs licensing deal with Gibson (https://www.crainsdetroit.com/manufacturing/detroit-based-echopark-guitars-signs-licensing-deal-gibson)
Lame attempt to deflect all the bad publicity by licensing a boutique maker.
-
Detroit-based Echopark Guitars signs licensing deal with Gibson (https://www.crainsdetroit.com/manufacturing/detroit-based-echopark-guitars-signs-licensing-deal-gibson)
Lame attempt to deflect all the bad publicity by licensing a boutique maker.
Why can't these boutique builders come up with their own original ideas? :rolleyes:
-
I would want to do my own thing, not someone else's.
-
I hadn't heard of Echopark before yesterday. Turns out there's a thread at the Gear Page about their terrible quality. It started April 30 and has racked up 58 pages since then. Looks like one horror story after another of terrible quality and customer service.
My Echopark Guitars Nightmare (https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?threads/my-echopark-guitars-nightmare.2042711/)
Gibson picks a winner! :rolleyes:
-
I hadn't heard of Echopark before yesterday. Turns out there's a thread at the Gear Page about their terrible quality. It started April 30 and has racked up 58 pages since then. Looks like one horror story after another of terrible quality and customer service.
My Echopark Guitars Nightmare (https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?threads/my-echopark-guitars-nightmare.2042711/)
Gibson picks a winner! :rolleyes:
I heard a Podcast interview with the Echopark guy. He was basically a felon of sorts who had guitar making skills in his back pocket, so he basically took that up to give himself something to do. From his chat he was all about returning to the pure form of electrical guitar manufacturing not seen since the '50s. The right materials and the right techniques. Quite funny that his guitars are a crock of shite, but oddly pleasing at the same time.
-
Detroit-based Echopark Guitars signs licensing deal with Gibson (https://www.crainsdetroit.com/manufacturing/detroit-based-echopark-guitars-signs-licensing-deal-gibson)
Lame attempt to deflect all the bad publicity by licensing a boutique maker.
YEP
-
if it was as efficient and airworthy as they say, someone would have brought something to market by now
They have for military aircraft (F-117; B-2). ... and if you think outside the triangular mono-wing box, even the F16, Concorde, and SR-71 fit the trend in a proto sense - you can see how the design got there.
... and uh, yeah eff Gibson (it occurs to me that if they focused on Chibsons, actual counterfeits, they'd have the support of darn near everybody; they could even get away with cracking down on decals and headstock veneers on ebay without very much public backlash, but no, they had to try the same old thing thet blew up in their faces last time with PRS ).
-
How lame is that! Now the guy who used to demo copies from Norm's and talk about how good they were is suddenly all about the originals. I do agree with him about Fender but he's such a hypocrite!
What about this? Guess it isn't "authentic". :mrgreen:
(https://images.reverb.com/image/upload/s--eK0HAoHb--/a_exif,c_limit,e_unsharp_mask:80,f_auto,fl_progressive,g_south,h_620,q_90,w_620/v1473979985/qbxasjxlnumfffsxuhcf.jpg)
Did anyone here have any respect for him to begin with? His demos sucked - he often got his info wrong (esp when it came to Gibson basses) and generally not a good speaker. He was OK at5 best - fact check everything he says.
I don't want to defend him, because principles should win (granted, I've never had a conflict of this magnitude to test mine) but he's new at Gibson, quit Norm's (right?) - his choice is suck that dick for your $50 or be out of work. Same old 'just following orders' thing.
Even though he wasn't that good (IMHO) I think he had enough of a following that if he had to he could launch his own youtube gear channel and based on his experience at Norm's and the public support he would have had for telling Gibson they're being stupid, could have made a real go of it.... but instead he's either a chicken shit or a whore. Hell, Dean would send him guitars to demo/review I'm sure of it - who better to do that for your V than someone who has actually played many original vintage Gibsons and therefore can compare them.
-
Jake you paraphrased Yo Cats by Frank Zappa! :)
-
Did anyone here have any respect for him to begin with? His demos sucked - he often got his info wrong (esp when it came to Gibson basses) and generally not a good speaker. He was OK at5 best - fact check everything he says.
Jake, I'm 100% sure you fact check most things you find on the internet. There is no reason he should be different :)
If I were to disrespect everyone who unknowingly called the early (and somewhat muddy) Gibson singlecoil bass pickup a mudbucker,
I'd have very few friends. I did not like his videos, actually I'm not to fond of reviews on line at all - but his presentation was not worse than most others I have seen.
I don't want to defend him, because principles should win (granted, I've never had a conflict of this magnitude to test mine) but he's new at Gibson, quit Norm's (right?) - his choice is suck that dick for your $50 or be out of work. Same old 'just following orders' thing.
You are absolutely right, let's all stop sucking dick and quit our jobs :-X
-
I heard a Podcast interview with the Echopark guy. He was basically a felon of sorts who had guitar making skills in his back pocket, so he basically took that up to give himself something to do. From his chat he was all about returning to the pure form of electrical guitar manufacturing not seen since the '50s. The right materials and the right techniques. Quite funny that his guitars are a crock of shite, but oddly pleasing at the same time.
If he's not already a felon, he may wind up being one yet, if what I'm reading on TGP is any indication.
-
Jake you paraphrased Yo Cats by Frank Zappa! :)
LOL, I often agree with him.... there are some disagreements
Jake, I'm 100% sure you fact check most things you find on the internet. There is no reason he should be different :)
If I were to disrespect everyone who unknowingly called the early (and somewhat muddy) Gibson singlecoil bass pickup a mudbucker,
I'd have very few friends. I did not like his videos, actually I'm not to fond of reviews on line at all - but his presentation was not worse than most others I have seen.
You are absolutely right, let's all stop sucking dick and quit our jobs :-X
If we ALL did at the same time it might actually work! You first though. ;) I never said quit; I said object to bad ideas, which doesn't always mean getting fired (lucky for me).
Opinions are like arsehoese... I think there are plenty of reviewers better than him (in terms of delivery).
-
Did anyone here have any respect for him to begin with? His demos sucked - he often got his info wrong (esp when it came to Gibson basses) and generally not a good speaker. He was OK at5 best - fact check everything he says.
I'm surprised he never broke a headstock when he was swinging guitars around in that storage space.
He clearly thinks he is a good speaker and musician.
-
How lame is that! Norm must be running out of rare guitars.
So today they're featuring a new MIM Tele
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX9CuxyzA5o
-
More Gibson stupidities:
https://youtu.be/9AHhKRqdtGs
-
Yep - saw that elsewhere. The humanity.
-
https://reverb.com/news/mysterious-video-shows-bulldozing-of-hundreds-of-gibson-firebird-x-guitars?utm_campaign=gibsonx&utm_content=%7B%7Bad.id&utm_medium=organic&utm_source=fb
-
This should be part of the "It takes a special kind of stupid" thread! :P
Oh, wait...it IS!
Well done.
-
Insane.
-
So today they're featuring a new MIM Tele
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX9CuxyzA5o
What's next? A $79 Rogue Rocketeer from Musicians Friend?
-
More Gibson stupidities:
https://youtu.be/9AHhKRqdtGs
Comment under the video: "These must be Chinese fakes because not one headstock broke." :mrgreen:
Comment under another video discussing this video: "I bet that as JC was driving that, he was saying over and over 'you don't want authenticity? You don't deserve my authenticity. Authenticity. Authenticity. Authenticity. Authenticity. 'Right until he needed to change his underpants." :mrgreen:
-
This should be part of the "It takes a special kind of stupid" thread! :P
Oh, wait...it IS!
Well done.
:) :) :)
-
This just came into my magazine's mail box:
Gibson-Response Regarding Firebird X Video:
The Firebird X destruction video that surfaced months ago was an isolated batch of Firebird X models built in 2009-2011 which were unsalvageable and damaged with unsafe components. This isolated group of Firebird X models were unable to be donated for any purpose and were destroyed accordingly.
Gibson recently announced its re-launch of the Gibson Foundation. Since 2002, the Gibson Foundation has provided thousands of guitars and donations to schools and charities in excess of $30 million. As a starting point, Gibson has committed to giving a guitar-a-day away over the next 1000 days. 100% of donations to the Gibson Foundation go directly towards giving the gift of music, re-affirming Gibson’s commitment to giving back, helping under-served music education programs, empowering music culture and encouraging the creation of music.
-
What the heck is an unsafe component on a guitar?
-
What the heck is an unsafe component on a guitar?
Windows 98 software? :mrgreen:
-
Windows 98 software? :mrgreen:
Love it! 8) 8) ;D ;D
-
Windows 98 software? :mrgreen:
In all seriousness Windows 98 SE was safer (and faster) than Win10. I was still using it up until all browsers stopped supporting it just a coupla years back. It flew and I never had malware issues.
-
Didn't Gibson buy back almost all the inventory of Fireturd X from their retailers, or am I remembering wrong?
Regardless, the amount of guitars destroyed in that video doesn't look like an isolated batch. That's probably a lot more than ever were bought at retail.
-
It think taking the stupid circuitry out with a soldering iron would be better than with a bulldozer.
-
Despite Gibson's suspicious explanation, here's the an extensive interview with BJ Wilkes, the man who took the video and uploaded it.
According to Wilkes, who says he was a facilities guy with Gibson, this was done post-Henry, and was done because the new investors needed to get these guitars off the books. That still doesn't make sense to me.
Rob's joke may not be a joke at all. From the interview: “...horrible guitar with too much technology all based on Windows 98 or something.”
https://youtu.be/_ft5J1lX4-o
-
I guess it's too expensive, but take out the pots, the pickusp, reuse the necks...
-
Despite Gibson's suspicious explanation, here's the an extensive interview with BJ Wilkes, the man who took the video and uploaded it.
According to Wilkes, who says he was a facilities guy with Gibson, this was done post-Henry, and was done because the new investors needed to get these guitars off the books. That still doesn't make sense to me.
If they were buy-backs from dealers, they were listed as material inventory and had to be destroyed to be claimed as a loss so they could be written off.
I guess it's too expensive, but take out the pots, the pickusp, reuse the necks...
They were already a loss and any further investment in tearing them apart only compounded that loss in labor dollars while devaluing the deduction to be made from declaring them lost material.
-
...and it's gone.
The original video posted to BJ's World has been pulled.
I suspect BJ was reminded about the non-disclosure agreements he (likely) signed but neglected to read while employed by Gibson.
-
On another forum it has been mentioned there was no NDA. Which is correct?
-
Windows 98 software? :mrgreen:
Exploding tuners?
-
On another forum it has been mentioned there was no NDA. Which is correct?
Pure speculation on my part, but most large companies have non-disclosure language in their employment and severance agreements.
In one of the videos, BJ indicated he took a severance package when Gibson closed its Memphis operations.
I suspect the original video and/or the subsequent interview may have violated a clause or two in that agreement.
Again, just a guess.
-
It's Tennessee. Our employment law basically amounts to, 'How may we facilitate the exploitation of our citizenry?' ...which means, actual NDA or not (and there probably is not one), Gibson could have brought a very expensive suit against the uploader with the courts predisposed to siding with them. I've seen the date of 2011 thrown around, yet heard this action as being described, takes place post-Henry, which makes it MUCH more recent. My money is that is IS recent, and Gibson once again bungles things by offering to donate guitars instead of just coming clean about it being a (legal) tax dodge. Whatever his business acumen, Gibson's new CEO clearly knows VERY little about PR. It may not be Henry's narcissism, but it's not Fender's monolithic indifference.
-
If they were buy-backs from dealers, they were listed as material inventory and had to be destroyed to be claimed as a loss so they could be written off.
It would have been easy for Gibson to say that, yet they chose to give a bullshit explanation. Another PR blunder.
...and it's gone.
The original video posted to BJ's World has been pulled.
I suspect BJ was reminded about the non-disclosure agreements he (likely) signed but neglected to read while employed by Gibson.
The Guitologist video I posted in post #162 is still up, and most of the destruction can be seen in that one.
It's Tennessee. Our employment law basically amounts to, 'How may we facilitate the exploitation of our citizenry?' ...which means, actual NDA or not (and there probably is not one), Gibson could have brought a very expensive suit against the uploader with the courts predisposed to siding with them. I've seen the date of 2011 thrown around, yet heard this action as being described, takes place post-Henry, which makes it MUCH more recent. My money is that is IS recent, and Gibson once again bungles things by offering to donate guitars instead of just coming clean about it being a (legal) tax dodge. Whatever his business acumen, Gibson's new CEO clearly knows VERY little about PR. It may not be Henry's narcissism, but it's not Fender's monolithic indifference.
In the Guitologist video, BJ was clear that it was post-Henry and that JC was already there (probably still during the Chapter 11, before he became CEO of the new company). I don't see how this could have been kept under wraps since 2011.
-
I saw a new video today of ES guitars being broken in two and then fed through a bandsaw. I'm not sure if this was sent out by Gibson as a 'look guys, we trash factory seconds all the time', type deal.
In my opinion the Firebird X video was a publicity stunt that misfired (again!). The whole point would be to send home a strong message; the Henry J-era bullshit was getting crushed and Gibson were starting over. Unfortunately people don't really want to see Gibson trashing guitars most can't afford, even if the guitars are horrific.
I don't understand why the Firebird X even had to be so complex. From the demo videos they basically stuck the guts of an old Zoom 505 processor inside a fairly ugly guitar.
It sort of reminded me of the British aircraft industry. Great for pumping out propeller fighters and bombers during WW2, but totally unable to adapt and modernise following that, with the chief issue being ingrained attitudes in the workers and those at the top.
-
It sort of reminded me of the British aircraft industry. Great for pumping out propeller fighters and bombers during WW2, but totally unable to adapt and modernise...
Why did this come to mind. :mrgreen:
https://www.morgan-motor.com
-
Why did this come to mind. :mrgreen:
https://www.morgan-motor.com
Completely OT, but Morgan was bought by an Italian company earlier this year...such gorgeous cars IMO.
-
r...such gorgeous cars IMO.
Yes, they are! :)
-
When I first became fascinated with cars, the two I wanted most were a Morgan 3 Wheeler and a Lotus Seven America. The downside was that everyone I knew who owned a British car spent most of their spare time working on them. Even the ones that were reliable needed to be fiddled with all the time.
-
I was taken over by a Morgan 3-wheeler some weeks ago. Love 'm!!
-
We have a new neighbor who showed up at the annual neighborhood car show with a gorgeous early 80's Morgan, in the inevitable deep British green. I drooled around it (not on it) appropriately.
-
Why did this come to mind. :mrgreen:
https://www.morgan-motor.com
Morgan are a wee bit like Heritage guitars I guess. Lower production run, lots of period techniques, no hurry to get them out the door?
Gibson seem not to know how to embrace a world driven increasingly by social media. Their behavior is bizarre and inappropriate.
-
I was struck by Gibson's refusal to issue guitars as seconds. That's silly, especially for a brand trying to distance itself from being a "status" company toward one geared more for the average player. Gibson's QC on their supposed "firsts" is pretty abominable sometimes anyway! My first bass was a Fender second bought new. I bought it because it was A. a Fender and B. I could afford it, something not possible had it not been a second. If Gibson wants to shed their "doctors and lawyers" image, selling seconds would be a great way to develop lower-income customers AND develop brand loyalty. I don't think I'll ever get that image of those Firebird X's being crushed out of my head.
-
I was struck by Gibson's refusal to issue guitars as seconds. That's silly, especially for a brand trying to distance itself from being a "status" company toward one geared more for the average player. Gibson's QC on their supposed "firsts" is pretty abominable sometimes anyway! My first bass was a Fender second bought new. I bought it because it was A. a Fender and B. I could afford it, something not possible had it not been a second. If Gibson wants to shed their "doctors and lawyers" image, selling seconds would be a great way to develop lower-income customers AND develop brand loyalty. I don't think I'll ever get that image of those Firebird X's being crushed out of my head.
They did used to sell seconds. I had an acoustic guitar and I remember a friend had an electric 336 shaped something or other in the 60's. They were stamped on the back of the headstock with either a 2 or a II to indicate status.
-
I know some brands who use seconds for artists. Perfectly good basses with a little ding or scratch. I think that's a win win. The artist as a great free/cheap bass with some minor flaws and of course won't complain. The factory gets rid of it easy,
-
Gibson sold seconds during the Norlin era, they were stamped with a 2. Whatever defect there was usually wasn't major and usually doesn't affect what the value is today.
Given my own experience with recent era Gibson firsts, and what I've seen online, I'd hate to take a close look at the ones they discard.
-
I actually just bought one of their less expensive acoustic guitars, and was amazed at the fit, finish and setup. Flawless.
Could the Montana factory have a different quality control system?
My last two Gibson electrics from Nashville, I think (one guitar, one bass) were not even close when they arrived, but with a serious setup were fine.
-
I actually just bought one of their less expensive acoustic guitars, and was amazed at the fit, finish and setup. Flawless.
Could the Montana factory have a different quality control system?
My last two Gibson electrics from Nashville, I think (one guitar, one bass) were not even close when they arrived, but with a serious setup were fine.
The Montana factory has a much better reputation for QC.
My last two were the SG Special Bass that separated and warped along the center seam, and the SG Standard Bass they sent me to replace it (since the Special had been discontinued). That one was better but the nitro hadn't cured and developed a lot of defects. Good setups couldn't have helped either of those. At least I came out ahead on the deal.
Before that, there was the LP Special Bass I bought from American Musical back around 2005/2006, that one hadn't been routed or sanded properly and the finish looked like it had been thrown at the bass by monkeys. That one went back right away.
I won't buy new Gibsons anymore, not that I'm in the market now.
-
Am I crazy that I still want one of the new LP JR DC?
I'd probably wait for one to turn up used though. The last new bass I bought was a Danelectro "hodad" that I think I paid $200 for around 2002.
There's so much playable used gear available nowadays I've never had trouble finding something I wanted!
-
I would like a Thunderbird someday...with new prices being what they are, it will definitely be used.
-
Two of my current small stable were bought only slightly used, and at well below new price. You need to be patient but be ready to act when you see what you want at the right price.
-
When I first became fascinated with cars, the two I wanted most were a Morgan 3 Wheeler and a Lotus Seven America. The downside was that everyone I knew who owned a British car spent most of their spare time working on them. Even the ones that were reliable needed to be fiddled with all the time.
For me it was a Triumph GT6, then an MGA, then a Spitfire, and MGB. In my experience you need to own at least 2 British sports cars. One to drive and one to work on.
-
For me it was a Triumph GT6, then an MGA, then a Spitfire, and MGB. In my experience you need to own at least 2 British sports cars. One to drive and one to work on.
And a baking sheet to catch the leaks.