- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What do you guys think of Gibson’s ongoing tactics towards other guitar manufacturers?
Posted on 2/26/20 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 2/26/20 at 2:47 pm
For those unaware, Gibson has been engaged in a war with other guitar manufacturers, large and small regarding what they are calling trademark infringements. In short they are trying to claim that they own the rights to the les Paul, fire bird and Flying V body shapes and are sending out cease and desist letters to manufacturers and in many cases having inventory seized. Now what makes this interesting is the fact that while the US patent office allows for the trademarking of headstock shapes, they have stopped short of allowing body shapes to be trademarked. The reason being that the US patent office recognizes that there are a limited number of shapes that make for a guitar to fit the natural contours of the body.
Personally I think it’s an incredibly shite move and has been a public relations disaster for the company. I also find it incredibly hypocritical for a company that was in the virtual toilet in the 80’s until a certain top hatted musician brought them back into prominence with a LES PAUL COPY to be suing anyone over body shapes.
Here is a link to their latest disaster where they had their arse handed to them by Keisel Guitars, formerly known as Carvin. LINK
Personally I think it’s an incredibly shite move and has been a public relations disaster for the company. I also find it incredibly hypocritical for a company that was in the virtual toilet in the 80’s until a certain top hatted musician brought them back into prominence with a LES PAUL COPY to be suing anyone over body shapes.
Here is a link to their latest disaster where they had their arse handed to them by Keisel Guitars, formerly known as Carvin. LINK
This post was edited on 2/26/20 at 2:50 pm
8
Posted on 2/26/20 at 3:01 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
Gibson is the sick, old man of music. They’re “too big to fail”, but will crash the instrument markets when they do.
I’m an LP guy, but will likely never play on a real Gibson due to price nor a Gibson brand due to Epi’s being garbage for the price.
I’m an LP guy, but will likely never play on a real Gibson due to price nor a Gibson brand due to Epi’s being garbage for the price.
This post was edited on 2/26/20 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 2/26/20 at 3:08 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
I refuse to fret over it
Posted on 2/26/20 at 3:15 pm to kingbob
Gibson’s financial problems have nothing to do with competition from other manufacturers and everything to do with a reputation of producing substandard instruments at very high end prices.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 3:15 pm to Kafka
Gibson can’t seem to Fender off the competition
Posted on 2/26/20 at 3:20 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
Gibson’s financial problems have nothing to do with competition from other manufacturers and everything to do with a reputation of producing substandard instruments at very high end prices.
If they spent as much energy on QC as they do on patent trolling, they’d be fine.
Gibson makes a Cadillac premium product at premium prices, but has serious inconsistencies in quality with their guitars. You can’t market yourself as a premium brand at premium prices putting out that many lemons.
At the same time, they own an entry level guitar brand that makes instruments that are inferior to their competitors at the same price point. Rther than acquire or learn from their competitors to improve Epi, they sabotage them with endless law suits and weird wood importation regulation shenanigans.
Beginners don’t want Epis because they’re trash, and the older established musician crowd is shunning Gibson due to their inconsistent quality (can’t afford the risk of buying a lemon at that price).
Fender seems like they’re killing it in the beginner and midrange market with squire and their Mexican teles and strats. PRS and Schecter, and ESP also seems to be doing fairly well in that midrange market among metal and rock fans.
This post was edited on 2/26/20 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 2/26/20 at 4:18 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
Incredible that they would want to go through all that horrific nonsense that was the "Headstock Wars" with body styles.
For acoustics, too, Gibson? FFS...
For acoustics, too, Gibson? FFS...
Posted on 2/26/20 at 4:49 pm to Kafka
quote:
I refuse to fret over it
Well, you've never been high-strung.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 5:09 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
So Martin ought to return the favor for all those years of Gibson's copying their dreadnoughts?
Posted on 2/26/20 at 5:30 pm to awestruck
The theory is that because the conglomerate that bought Gibson has a history of buying and selling companies, they are using the tactics to try and force smaller companies into bullshite licensing agreements with Gibson. In another words they want to be able to license what they consider official Gibson shapes. Once they have a certain threshold, which in turn would pump up Gibson’s value as a company, they would then turn around and sell Gibson for a profit. So what if it completely destroys the rest of the Gibson brand and puts smaller companies out of business as long as they can essentially flip Gibson for a profit.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 5:54 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
Well, all 3 guitars have a pretty iconic body shape that is recognizable in an instant, as do strats and teles and jazzmasters/ jaguars and some other guitars. Is any guitar maker doing a straight copy of a Les Paul? I know there are some strat and tele copies.....I have one made by Burns Guitars, but there is enough difference that nobody would confuse the two. I guess what I'm saying is I'm ok with Gibson protecting an iconic body shape but if another maker tweaks the gibson shape a bit I'm ok with that too. I'm gonna go play my Guild now.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 6:48 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
Meanwhile the Chinese continue to crank these out
Posted on 2/26/20 at 7:17 pm to Zappas Stache
quote:
Is any guitar maker doing a straight copy of a Les Paul?
Not, but there are clearly makes and models that capture the vibe (whether consciously or unconsciously) of various Gibson models - just using 1 maker:
Ibanez AX
Ibanez AR
Ibanez ART
Again, I think at a certain point, such litigation is bullshite. The headstock stuff (which Ibanez and, particularly ESP seemed guilty of, particularly and I think highly of guitars from those manufacturers) was a little more blatant.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 7:20 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
Get a top end Burny and give Gibson the bird. Burny not only makes better guitars than Gibson these days, they're built to the old Gibson specs and they're roughly one third the price. Only drawback is you have to buy them sight unseen through the internet. I got my RLG-85 Les Paul and it's my favorite one I own out of my seven guitars. Better than any of the other Gibson LPs I've owned and discarded and those were '78, '81 and '85.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 8:09 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
In short they are trying to claim that they own the rights to the les Paul, fire bird and Flying V body shapes and are sending out cease and desist letters
To be fair, the les paul is a highly copied guitar. I switched over to an ESP eclipse II BB and have been satisfied. They need to get a grip on their pricing.
I'd also like to get a new pair of Edwards and Burny les Paul customs too.
Japanese companies can make quality instruments.
This post was edited on 2/26/20 at 8:22 pm
Posted on 2/26/20 at 8:18 pm to Zappas Stache
quote:
Is any guitar maker doing a straight copy of a Les Paul?
It’s not even exact copies they are going after. They sent a cease and desist letter to Keisel guitars in the op that I mentioned. That design came out in 1985 under the Carven brand. It actually looks more like a reversed Jackson RR V than a Gibson. Furthermore, Gibson tried this in 2005 when they sued PRS and they eventually lost and PRS prevailed. Ergonomically, there are only so many shapes that a guitar can be functionally be and the patent office recognizes this. If they said Gibson holds all rights to the Les Paul shape and Fender owns all rights to the strat shape, there would essentially be two guitar manufacturers. Unless it’s some proprietary technology, they don’t hold any exclusive rights to the shape of the body... Also the EU rejected their claims recently as well.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 8:37 pm to SEClint
quote:
To be fair, the les paul is a highly copied guitar
But again, we are talking about the shape of the body. Gibson is trying to say that they own the shape of the Les Paul, a solid body single cutaway guitar and that any company that produces any sort of variation of that is infringing on the Gibson brand.
Btw, if you’re a consumer of guitars you should be against this. It’s only going to drive smaller companies out of business or drive up the prices of other guitars if it continues
This post was edited on 2/26/20 at 8:40 pm
Posted on 2/26/20 at 8:39 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
Believe it or not one of the most tightly guarded Gibson trademark items is the bell shaped truss rod cover.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 9:30 pm to SEClint
quote:
Japanese companies can make quality instruments.
Is that guitar lying on a concrete floor with no protection? Jesus, man. Show some respect.
Posted on 2/26/20 at 9:40 pm to TheCurmudgeon
That one is just an example of a burny les paul.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News