Eastwood RD Bass

[Alanko]

I think cribbing a photo straight off the Gibson website is incredibly clumsy. It would put me off backing this project (as if I would anyway, I'm Scottish lolol), because the thing might vanish overnight. At the moment this bass is vapourware, with Eastwood only making the sodding things if they get enough money and if their clumsy tactics don't land them a C&D from Gibson.

[Dave W]

Actually, you can if no one else has trademarked it.  Phantom Guitar Works owns the trademark on Vox's original Phantom and teardrop shapes because Vox supposedly abandoned it.  That's why the Vox Phantom reissue  (32" scale) is not available in the US. 

Gibson could have applied for a trademark on the RD shape/name when they did the recent reissue if they didn't already have one.

I think we're saying the same thing, Gibson abandoned its trademarks when it abandoned the RD, just as Vox supposedly did.

If Gibson trademarked the reissue, they would still have to keep producing it for it to remain valid. The problem, of course, is that they can still intimidate others with the threat of litigation, since fighting a trademark infingement suit supposedly costs around $1 million these days.

I think cribbing a photo straight off the Gibson website is incredibly clumsy. It would put me off backing this project (as if I would anyway, I'm Scottish lolol), because the thing might vanish overnight. At the moment this bass is vapourware, with Eastwood only making the sodding things if they get enough money and if their clumsy tactics don't land them a C&D from Gibson.

I hear you. It's brazen, all right. But Eastwood has done a number of what they call pre-funding projects over the past few years, and AFAIK no one has lost money if the project is never produced.

[dadagoboi]

I think we're saying the same thing, Gibson abandoned its trademarks when it abandoned the RD, just as Vox supposedly did.

If Gibson trademarked the reissue, they would still have to keep producing it for it to remain valid. The problem, of course, is that they can still intimidate others with the threat of litigation, since fighting a trademark infingement suit supposedly costs around $1 million these days.

I'm not sure how it works.  Ford hasn't made a Thunderbird in about a decade but I'd bet their trademark still applies to cars.  Other car companies have come up with vehicle model names only to find out that they were owned by other car companies even though they hadn't used the name for years.

Vox probably never HAD a trademark on Phantom; either the name or shape.  It's just that BS US intellectual property laws allowed it to be trademarked by someone with zero connection to the original idea or product.  That crap only flies in the land of the 'free'.  Thank you, Disney!

If there's a conflict and some lawyer can figure out how to make money off it you can be sure somebody is going to get sued.

  Eastwood knows what they're doing, they've been walking that line for years.  Gibson getting pissed off will just be free publicity.  Yay for the little(r) guy.

BTW, China is hard at work on LFTR nuclear reactors based on technology developed in the US but turned down as 'too expensive' in the 50s.  They've already given fair warning they will strongly defend their intellectual property.  Those Chinks, they copy EVERYTHING!

[Pilgrim]

Yeah, when it comes to Eastwood producing a bass design that Gibson has abandoned, and as long as they sell them as Eastwood products, I'm also squarely on the side of the little guy.  I'll bet they know what they're doing.

[66Atlas]

The company I work for manufactures commercial tech equipment.  Without going in to the boring details we maintain the trademarks on our product designs that have been discontinued by continuing to produce and sell the parts to maintain/rebuild them.  It wouldn't surprise me if the auto industry isnt somewhat similar.  If i dont want to continue making the parts myself (and in many cases i dont) I license the design to a sub to make it and control it that way. Also depending on your state you are protected from 3-5 years after you cease marketing your design. Sorry, that got boring after all 

The funny thing to me about the RD is that the local Guitar Centers in ATL couldnt get rid of those K N Signatures. the last one I saw was marked down to $699, had been hanging over a year and got moved to 3 different stores before it sold.  I thought about picking it up, but it basically offer all the back breaking weight of the original without cool pickups, so whats the point?

Anyway, good luck to Eastwood.

[nofi]

instrument wise atlanta is a pretty boring place. if you sold only fender and gibson products you could still make a living. 

[Basvarken]

As far as I know the Copyright remains with the person/company who designed the product in the first place. No matter if they still produce it.

[Dave W]

As far as I know the Copyright remains with the person/company who designed the product in the first place. No matter if they still produce it.

That's true of copyright unless it's sold or assigned, but this is a trademark issue. At least under US law, a trademark has to be used in commerce to remain valid. If it's abandoned, it's possible for someone else to trademark it, although that's rare. Usually a lapsed trademark just results in anyone being able to use it.

[dadagoboi]

What we should be talking about concerning bass bodies are design patents. They expire and become public domain like mechanical patents.  Somebody got the bright idea that they should be able to trademark shapes to get around that.

[uwe]

Frankly, and leaving my Gibson hat off for a moment,  if you take away the Moog electronics there is nothing outlandish about the RD bass except for its shape which - as someone once wrote (here or in the Dudepit) - "looks like TBird left too long in the car trunk on a hot day". Other than that it's an all maple bass with a set neck, big deal. Really the concept of a Ripper or a Ric minus the laminate neck thru. And as regards originality of sound any Ric can wipe the floor with an RD.

I still wonder how a maho RD (as the original prototypes were) would have sounded with those electronics though, the warmth of maho would take away some of the harshness - probably like an Ovation Magnum which was a similar concept (and another freak shape).

[dadagoboi]

I still wonder how a maho RD (as the original prototypes were).

I thought the original prototype was Entwistle's, as pictured in Bass Culture, pp152-53.  He declined it as his signature model but was too gracious to say why in the book.

Anyone have a picture one of those mahogany prototypes? This is the first I've heard of them.

[Psycho Bass Guy]

Eastwood photoshopped out the Gibson logo on the KN signature RD they show on the main page.  It was still there yesterday.

[veebass]

A guitar version offered as well.
Gibson logo still left in some of the pics.

http://eastwoodcustoms.com/projects/eastwood-rd-artist/

I have a couple of old RDs including a six string Artist.
Eastwood could drop the weight and still balance by reducing the body thickness to that of a Thunderbird and pulling the neck a little further into the body more like a T Bird.

I have seen assemble your own kits for RD basses.

http://www.pitbullguitars.com/shop/guitars/pit-bull-guitars-rd-4-electric-bass-guitar-kit/

[uwe]

I thought the original prototype was Entwistle's, as pictured in Bass Culture, pp152-53.  He declined it as his signature model but was too gracious to say why in the book.

Anyone have a picture one of those mahogany prototypes? This is the first I've heard of them.

I don't know whether JAE's prototype was maho, but Ralphe Armstrong's (the black cat with Jean-Luc Ponty) RD Artist model was maho and - I believe - fretless (though he probably had a fretted one too). It actually existed and he later sold it to some woman in the Detroit (?) area. I contacted her once whether she would consider selling, but never heard back. The ads that came out with Ralphe Armstrong at the time showed a/his maho RD.

I really think they made a mistake there when they went for maple. And not just for the weight too.

There were also Victory prototypes out of maho and I wouldn't be surprised if maho Rippers existed at one point too.

[dadagoboi]

JAE speaks: