Gibson confirms exclusive rights to trademarked guitar designs

Started by gearHed289, March 15, 2017, 09:18:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions

Dave W

#1
March 15, 2017, 10:07:07 AM
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

#2
March 15, 2017, 11:20:52 AM Last Edit: March 16, 2017, 05:38:37 AM by 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. ;D

TBird1958

#3
March 15, 2017, 11:45:49 AM

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.   
Resident T Bird playing Drag Queen www.thenastyhabits.com  "Impülsivê", the new lush fragrance as worn by the unbelievable Fräulein Rômmélle! Traces of black patent leather, Panzer grease, mahogany and model train oil mingle and combust to one sheer sensation ...

dadagoboi

#4
March 15, 2017, 12:10:14 PM Last Edit: March 15, 2017, 12:16:10 PM by dadagoboi
Quote from: TBird1958 on March 15, 2017, 11:45:49 AM
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

#5
March 15, 2017, 12:22:23 PM
Quote from: dadagoboi on March 15, 2017, 12:10:14 PM

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. 
Resident T Bird playing Drag Queen www.thenastyhabits.com  "Impülsivê", the new lush fragrance as worn by the unbelievable Fräulein Rômmélle! Traces of black patent leather, Panzer grease, mahogany and model train oil mingle and combust to one sheer sensation ...

Dave W

#6
March 15, 2017, 01:22:31 PM
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

#7
March 15, 2017, 01:28:28 PM
Hamer is back?
Contrary to what James Bond says, a good Gibson should be stirred, not shaken.

Dave W

#8
March 15, 2017, 01:55:53 PM
Quote from: 4stringer77 on March 15, 2017, 01:28:28 PM
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

#9
March 15, 2017, 06:26:56 PM
Quote from: Dave W on March 15, 2017, 01:22:31 PM
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.

Resident T Bird playing Drag Queen www.thenastyhabits.com  "Impülsivê", the new lush fragrance as worn by the unbelievable Fräulein Rômmélle! Traces of black patent leather, Panzer grease, mahogany and model train oil mingle and combust to one sheer sensation ...

BTL

#10
March 15, 2017, 09:23:04 PM
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

#11
March 16, 2017, 03:24:31 PM
Quote from: BeeTL on March 15, 2017, 09:23:04 PM
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

#12
March 16, 2017, 09:01:53 PM
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.
Print
Go Up Pages1
User actions