|
|
Post by geoff738 on Jun 20, 2019 12:01:38 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Jun 20, 2019 12:03:29 GMT -6
Im thinking this is probably about 40 years too late.
Cheers,
Geoff
|
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Jun 21, 2019 12:06:43 GMT -6
Im thinking this is probably about 40 years too late. Cheers, Geoff Yeah, like Billy Gibbons playing a Dean Guitar on the 1994 Eliminator album. đ |
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Jun 21, 2019 16:07:24 GMT -6
Did not know the fur guitars were Deans.
Doesnât really surprise me either though.
Cheers,
Geoff
|
|
|
|
Post by donr on Jun 26, 2019 11:59:22 GMT -6
How many ways can you make a 6 string headstock anyway? Three I think, 3 and 3, 6 in a row, and 4 and 2. Maybe 2 and 4.
Dean Zelinsky isn't part of Armadillo, he's moved on, no longer owning the name. He makes a great guitar that's sold direct.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Jun 26, 2019 13:05:29 GMT -6
They also have a snitch line. link
Although I understand this has been around for years. Not sure what to think of all this. It doesnât exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling about the new Gibson management, on the other hand, they have a legal obligation to protect their intellectual property. Actual counterfeits, obviously. Dean? Not so sure. If Gibson wins this do they go after Hamer next. Boutique builders making Juniors, albeit with modified head stocks? I dunno. Vs and Explorers have been copied since the 70s but not sure about SGS or Juniors. They may have a better case with those if they havenât been copied until more recently. What do do you Think? Has Gibson overstepped? Is this a pr disaster or just a necessary business move to protect their assets? I can see both sides. Cheers, Geoff |
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Jun 29, 2019 13:11:39 GMT -6
Gibson loses in the EU in a case going back to 2010. link
This refers to shape if the Flying V body only. Cheers, Geoff |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jun 29, 2019 16:37:21 GMT -6
They also have a snitch line. link
Although I understand this has been around for years. Not sure what to think of all this. It doesnât exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling about the new Gibson management, on the other hand, they have a legal obligation to protect their intellectual property. Actual counterfeits, obviously. Dean? Not so sure. If Gibson wins this do they go after Hamer next. Boutique builders making Juniors, albeit with modified head stocks? I dunno. Vs and Explorers have been copied since the 70s but not sure about SGS or Juniors. They may have a better case with those if they havenât been copied until more recently. What do do you Think? Has Gibson overstepped? Is this a pr disaster or just a necessary business move to protect their assets? I can see both sides. Cheers, Geoff Gibson has overstepped for sure. They must have seven league boots. This lawsuits are nothing more than an admission that they are not capable of building an instrument of the level of quality that made their reputation but they think they can overcharge for second rate merchandise and get away with it if they bully companies that are making instruments of similar quality to their current product for a more realistic price point.
Speaking as the proud owner of a '59 J-200 that makes every new J-200 I've seen in years look like unfinished junk.
And they're about 40 years late on trademark enforcement of most or all of the body shapes listed on their "trademarks" page. If you don't protect your trademark it goes away. You can't let it lapse into public domain and then try to reclaim it.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Jul 10, 2019 21:04:38 GMT -6
Dean is firing back. link
Cheers, Geoff |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jul 10, 2019 21:32:49 GMT -6
Dean is firing back. link
Cheers, Geoff Go Dean/Armadillo!
This is no way for James Curleigh to revitalize Gibson. In fact it is a strong indication that Curleigh has no intention whatsoever to restore Gibson to its former glory and has every intention to milk the brand for everything it's worth while continuing to drive it into the ground.
I love (the real) Gibson and have for over half a century. But this makes it painfully obvious that the current management are not only idiots, they are vulture capitalists of the worst possible kind.
It's incredible, but the current crowd are stacking up to actually be WORSE than Henry J.
The best possible thing they could do now is to turn the company over to Armadillo, a company that still cares somewhat about building quality instruments.
What made Gibson the respected guitar builder that it was is NOT the "ownership" of body styles (most of which they have no real legitimate claim to), it was QUALITY. Bertter quality than any other electric guitar maker, any other builder of mandolins and banjos, and one of the two best acoustic guitar makers in the world. (other than a few tiny bouitique luthiers.) It was NOT the shapes of their bodies.
What happened to the days of "Only a Gibson Is Good Enough"? Because that sure as hell ain't true now.
Hey Curleigh - You wanna change my mind? Make a production J-200 that I'm willing to play! Because it's been many, many years since I've seen a new J-200 in a store that I've considered acceptable ($50,000 "museum grade" guitars not included.). And price it at a level that working musicians can afford, not only Doctors, Lawyers, and Business Executives*.
* - a nod to the great Malvina Reynolds (who was a college friend of my father, not that that means anything....)
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Jul 26, 2019 21:46:54 GMT -6
Things getting weirder. Gibson licensing various trademarks to Echopark guitars. link
Play authentic? May or may not include instruments built by licences.Guess you gotta read the small print now. Cheers, Geoff |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jul 27, 2019 0:15:14 GMT -6
Things getting weirder. Gibson licensing various trademarks to Echopark guitars. link
Play authentic? May or may not include instruments built by licences.Guess you gotta read the small print now. Cheers, Geoff UMmmm, RIGHT!
Echopark makes $20,000 guitars for Johnny Depp and friends. That's REALLY a step in the right direction!
(Not)
I want to see a $3000 J-200 of the same quality as my '59.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Jul 27, 2019 9:44:07 GMT -6
I met Gabe at Echopark early on and own 4 of his guitars. None cost even close to $20K, but they are better than any Gibson Iâve owned including the custom shop 59 reissue I sold because it paled in comparison. I think everyone is entitled to protect their intellectual property but If Gibson would start making decent guitars consistently again they wouldnât need to file law suits to compete.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Jul 27, 2019 13:09:24 GMT -6
Apparently at least two other companies have also been âgrantedâ licenses. But apparently part of the deal is they agreed to state that the body shapes are trademarks of Gibson as part of the deal. see for example the small print at the bottom of Echoparkâs page link. Also, is Echopark really a company that you would want to associate yourself with if you were trying to reestablish a reputation for high quality instruments?This link would certainly give me pause. Was Gibson not aware of this? It all seems like a desperate move by Gibson to get some builders to say that the body shapes are trademarked so they can go in to court with Dean and say that the industry recognizes the V and so on as being Gibson trademarks. And I post this as the owner of a couple Gibsonâs. Cheers, Geoff |
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Aug 1, 2019 11:34:22 GMT -6
Glad they arenât going after whoever makes these:
|
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Aug 1, 2019 12:23:32 GMT -6
Not to start a war with anyone here but I have four Echopark guitars that I would put up against any Gibson or Fender custom shop guitars. I've actually sold all my Gibson and Fender Custom shops after getting my Echopark guitars. Just like the GS forum, there are a lot of people on the GP forum that have never owned one, but just want to bitch and complain about pictures they've seen. It's the typical internet theme, you hear a lot more from people who want to bitch than people that are happy and satisfied. That's not to say that I don't covet my other guitars from builders like Tom Anderson, Nik Huber, Collings, McPherson, National, and a few others. With that being said, it is kind of fun to visit the Echopark threads on the GP site to see some of the guys over there work themselves into a tizzy and heaven forbid if anyone wants to comment on having a different experience or personal opinion. Kind of reminds me of what is going on in other parts of the world today.
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Aug 1, 2019 13:32:51 GMT -6
I wonder if Gibson and Fender custom shops have so many orders they canât possibly make a guitar as good as others can? Obviously others can and do, and can charge a ton for it. So shouldnât Gibson and Fender raise the price and take the time to do it like it should be done? I guess they still be just as busy even if they doubled the price (or maybe busier-if the quality was 100%). So what price would they charge to slow down the orders and take time to do it right? My friend ordered from Wal and it was a 2 year wait, when it arrived he spent over $10k after shipping/duty. Was it worth it? Well he loved it so much he ordered another 6 months later. The quality is pretty incredible. Thatâs what they should be doing really. Gibson should be the very best brand, even if they are $50k each. Then make a splinter brand that is their current stuff at current prices. Well epiphone is sort of there already haha. This is not a good look for the ânewâ Gibson.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Aug 1, 2019 16:08:23 GMT -6
Has everybody seen the video of them crushing several hundred Firebird Xs yet?
The guitar related internet is losing its collective mind over this. And Iâm pretty much in agreement. They couldnât have salvaged the parts, donated them? Something, anything other than just destroying them and sending them to landfill. Their excuse rings pretty hollow. Iâm sure it made sense from an accounting perspective.
Cheers,
Geoff
|
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Aug 1, 2019 16:26:45 GMT -6
The âunsafe componentsâ comment in the article I read is intriguing. Weâre these the rocket launcher models? Seriously, what would be unsafe components that are not on other guitars. Maybe the robotic tuning could cut off a finger if it was under the high E string and it malfunctioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Aug 1, 2019 16:40:24 GMT -6
I mean possibly a battery that could catch fire. That is not unheard of. Thatâs about all I can think of that could be legitimately dangerous. Although they were maple necks, so possibly they donât break in a fall?
Cheers,
Geoff
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Aug 1, 2019 16:42:38 GMT -6
Hereâs a link to the story. Not about trademark stuff, but some more dubious pr for the new Gibson. Cheers, Geoff |
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Aug 1, 2019 16:54:52 GMT -6
Ok, some folks suggesting these were flood damaged or had mould. Could be, but why did they wait until years later to destroy them?
Cheers,
Geoff
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 1, 2019 21:09:04 GMT -6
Not to start a war with anyone here but I have four Echopark guitars that I would put up against any Gibson or Fender custom shop guitars. I've actually sold all my Gibson and Fender Custom shops after getting my Echopark guitars. Just like the GS forum, there are a lot of people on the GP forum that have never owned one, but just want to bitch and complain about pictures they've seen. It's the typical internet theme, you hear a lot more from people who want to bitch than people that are happy and satisfied. That's not to say that I don't covet my other guitars from builders like Tom Anderson, Nik Huber, Collings, McPherson, National, and a few others. With that being said, it is kind of fun to visit the Echopark threads on the GP site to see some of the guys over there work themselves into a tizzy and heaven forbid if anyone wants to comment on having a different experience or personal opinion. Kind of reminds me of what is going on in other parts of the world today. I've owned a number of vintage (pre Norlin) Gibson guitars.
THOSE are my benchmark.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2019 21:32:18 GMT -6
Wonder if Gibson's going to start suing other manufacturers for making guitars with strings on them...
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Oct 14, 2019 2:03:41 GMT -6
Wonder if Gibson's going to start suing other manufacturers for making guitars with strings on them... That goes back to the Arabic culture... But sueing a company for intellectual property rights should have some ground and IMO Dean guitars do not look like a Gibson. To me the lawsuit shows how desperate Gibson is. They need money. They now put Dean guitars on eyeheight that's nothing but suicide.... |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 14, 2019 19:32:30 GMT -6
They also have a snitch line. link
Although I understand this has been around for years. Not sure what to think of all this. It doesnât exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling about the new Gibson management, on the other hand, they have a legal obligation to protect their intellectual property. Cheers, Geoff Basic headstock and body shapes are NOT their "intellectual property."
I'm a huge intellectual property activist. This ain't it. This is the trademark equivalent of copyright trolling.
There is no way this is goiung to work out without hurting Gibson, even if they should happen to "win" in an idiot court that does not understand the real issues and the depth of tradition involved.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 14, 2019 19:35:40 GMT -6
They also have a snitch line. link
Although I understand this has been around for years. Not sure what to think of all this. It doesnât exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling about the new Gibson management, on the other hand, they have a legal obligation to protect their intellectual property. Actual counterfeits, obviously. Dean? Not so sure. If Gibson wins this do they go after Hamer next. Boutique builders making Juniors, albeit with modified head stocks? I dunno. Vs and Explorers have been copied since the 70s but not sure about SGS or Juniors. They may have a better case with those if they havenât been copied until more recently. What do do you Think? Has Gibson overstepped? Is this a pr disaster or just a necessary business move to protect their assets? I can see both sides. Cheers, Geoff A Les Paul Junior is such a bog standard body shape that there's NO WAY IN HELL that Gibson could have a legitimate claim. You could go back to some of the Merle Travis/Bigsby guitars that have the exact same basic body.Most of what Gibson is suing over has been in the public domain for at least 30 or 40 years, if not longer. And the original Gibson company - and Norlin - did not protect any trademark that might have existed. Which means that's any of that is void. |
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Oct 14, 2019 20:15:22 GMT -6
Not sure itâs been mentioned in this thread. But, a couple companies, including Echopark, are now saying their Gibby shaped guitars are licenced by Gibson, and there is small print on their website that the Flying V and Explorer are Gibson trademarks.
Makes me wonder who else theyâve tried to beat down.
Cheers,
Geoff
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 14, 2019 22:35:31 GMT -6
Not sure itâs been mentioned in this thread. But, a couple companies, including Echopark, are now saying their Gibby shaped guitars are licenced by Gibson, and there is small print on their website that the Flying V and Explorer are Gibson trademarks. Makes me wonder who else theyâve tried to beat down. Cheers, Geoff Gibson has a case with the Explorer. With the V it's questionable, as there have been Vs made by other companies for so many years without dispute.
In the case of really small companies it's probably a matter of being unable to cover the costs of fighting it in court. This is a common tactic of large(r) companies with relatively deep pockets bullying small conpanies that can't afford even a modest defense. After bullying a few small companies into submission because they can't afford to pay for a defense, the aggressor then attempts to use those cases as precedent to go after bigger game.
It's a REALLY sleazy tactic.
SHAME on Gibson!
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Oct 14, 2019 22:45:05 GMT -6
Not sure itâs been mentioned in this thread. But, a couple companies, including Echopark, are now saying their Gibby shaped guitars are licenced by Gibson, and there is small print on their website that the Flying V and Explorer are Gibson trademarks. Makes me wonder who else theyâve tried to beat down. Cheers, Geoff Gibson has a case with the Explorer. With the V it's questionable, as there have been Vs made by other companies for so many years without dispute.
In the case of really small companies it's probably a matter of being unable to cover the costs of fighting it in court. This is a common tactic of large(r) companies with relatively deep pockets bullying small conpanies that can't afford even a modest defense. After bullying a few small companies into submission because they can't afford to pay for a defense, the aggressor then attempts to use those cases as precedent to go after bigger game.
It's a REALLY sleazy tactic.
SHAME on Gibson!
Itâs obviously also a tactic to say, look, these guitar companies agree we have a trademark. To avoid being sued. And to buttress Gibsonâs suit against Dean. Yeah, kinda unseemly. I know a builder who does G style things that no longer has them on his website for fear of the letter from their lawyers. And that was way before all this mess. Even with a changed headstock. So, this isnât really new. Cheers, Geoff |
|
