I have heard a lot of folks talk about DiMarzio having a lock on the double cream humbucker thing. As a recovering lawyer, I was wondering how they aquired that "right"? Have they ever succesfully sued anyone to prevent them from producing a double cream pickup or have they just made threatening noises? If i recall correctly, when Gibson's suppliers ran out of black plastic back in the day, Gibson produced both zebra AND double cream bobbin buckers. So how did DiMarzio aquire a protectable right in something that they arguably stole from Gibson? If Gibson didn't protect the trade dress of their pickups because they never dsigned them to be used without the covers, then that would mean that Dimarzio could make double creams, BUT I have trouble seeing how DiMarzio could protect something that they didn't invent anyway. It would be like another soda company ripping off the classic Coke bottle design and Coke not suing them. While Coke might not be able to protect the design anymore, the other company couldn't prevent Coke from using it. I'm confused:laugh2: Evan......can you clarify this for me?
Double Cream issue
- Thread starter jdm61
- Start date
Gunny47
New member
Re: Double Cream issue
I asked a similar question recently. I don't know about the legal aspect, but if you want double cream humbuckers, there is a way around it. Like for Seymour Duncans, just get a custom ordered double cream pickup WITH the cover on it. You can get it soddered on less and just take the cover off, no harm, no foul from DiMarzio.
DiMarzio also has the phrase "PAF" in a name locked under a patten, which makes no sense, becuase they dont specialize in vintage style pickups and the ones tht they make are crap.
I asked a similar question recently. I don't know about the legal aspect, but if you want double cream humbuckers, there is a way around it. Like for Seymour Duncans, just get a custom ordered double cream pickup WITH the cover on it. You can get it soddered on less and just take the cover off, no harm, no foul from DiMarzio.
DiMarzio also has the phrase "PAF" in a name locked under a patten, which makes no sense, becuase they dont specialize in vintage style pickups and the ones tht they make are crap.
Re: Double Cream issue
I can understand trying to protect or register PAF as a trademark, but it would be difficult to defend because that was a generic term used for Gibson pickups long before DiMarzio started using it. The guys in the patent and trademark office didn';t do their hoimework onj that one. I'm wondering if DiMarzio has been advised by some attorney that if they make enough noise, no little pickup maker will take the chance and spend the money to defend the right to make double cream pickups. There is a darn good chance that DiMarzio would lose such a lawsuit, but they have more money and time to find that out than most makers.
I can understand trying to protect or register PAF as a trademark, but it would be difficult to defend because that was a generic term used for Gibson pickups long before DiMarzio started using it. The guys in the patent and trademark office didn';t do their hoimework onj that one. I'm wondering if DiMarzio has been advised by some attorney that if they make enough noise, no little pickup maker will take the chance and spend the money to defend the right to make double cream pickups. There is a darn good chance that DiMarzio would lose such a lawsuit, but they have more money and time to find that out than most makers.
Re: Double Cream issue
If it was patent rights, then they have expired after 17 years whcih would have been no later than 1995 or so.......it would have to have been trade dress rights for them to still be protected. Sonds like whoever got sued didn't have enough money to hire effective counsel. I was thinking.......Gibson invented the humbucker AND the double cream bobbins, albeit covered, and arguably, Eric Clapton invented or at least popularized the uncovered bucker mod. So diMarzio waited for Gibson's patents to run out and ripped off their pickup design (as did everyone else....sorry Seymour.....lol) AND registered a trade mark/trade dress on double cream. What am I missing here? lolidsnowdog said:
Last edited:
BachToRock
New member
Re: Double Cream issue
AMEN TO THAT!idsnowdog said:
chill
New member
Re: Double Cream issue
I suspect DiMarzio used the double creams for 5 years and stopped someone from infringing on their trademark. Even though other folks invented it and probably used it in that time (e.g. Gibson), DiMarzio probably proved it was their mark.
However, I've wondered if a maker could use a cream colored "natural" plastic without dye to make it an issue of production cost, which have some protection as well.
I suspect DiMarzio used the double creams for 5 years and stopped someone from infringing on their trademark. Even though other folks invented it and probably used it in that time (e.g. Gibson), DiMarzio probably proved it was their mark.
However, I've wondered if a maker could use a cream colored "natural" plastic without dye to make it an issue of production cost, which have some protection as well.
Re: Double Cream issue
My question remains. I know that if Gibson chose not to protect the trade dress, then ANYONE could use it. But DiMarzio has taken the protection over from Gibson somehow and i suspect that Gibson didn't sell the rights to them:laugh2: I belive that the legal argument would be that when gibson did not prevent DiMarzio from using the trade dress, it had become "generic"chill said:
T
TheArchitect
Guest
Re: Double Cream issue
They trademarked it, not a patent. Very important difference.
idsnowdog said:
They trademarked it, not a patent. Very important difference.
T
TheArchitect
Guest
Re: Double Cream issue
I would suggest you use your legal skills and look up the trademark. Get it right from the horses mouth
jdm61 said:
I would suggest you use your legal skills and look up the trademark. Get it right from the horses mouth
Mr 9finger
Digitally Challenged
Re: Double Cream issue
It's a recoginition issue. Back in the day, Larry Dimarzio only made double cream pickups. Back then, there wasn't all these other makers, but a handful. Larry was granted that patent so there would no confusion over what brand a double cream pickup would be. BUT....that was issued a long time ago and I'm sure w/ the evolution of mulitple pickup colors, even glow in the dark, there wouldn't be much of a case if someone really pushed the issue.
Gibson tried to use the recognition tactic on PRS but it didn't work for obvious reasons. Though it would be alot harder to distinguish a pickup w/out pulling for nonafficianados.
It's a recoginition issue. Back in the day, Larry Dimarzio only made double cream pickups. Back then, there wasn't all these other makers, but a handful. Larry was granted that patent so there would no confusion over what brand a double cream pickup would be. BUT....that was issued a long time ago and I'm sure w/ the evolution of mulitple pickup colors, even glow in the dark, there wouldn't be much of a case if someone really pushed the issue.
Gibson tried to use the recognition tactic on PRS but it didn't work for obvious reasons. Though it would be alot harder to distinguish a pickup w/out pulling for nonafficianados.
Re: Double Cream issue
This would almost have to be a trade DRESS issue,not a trademark. The DiMarzio logo would be a trademark and include the trade name. The trade name protection may be what the argue for the use of PAF. Trade dress refers to a appearance of a product that cannot be specifically trademarked. Normally, the key to bringing an action is that someone elses use "causes confusion in the marketplace" This is slightly different than a blatant trademark/copyright infirngement case like Gibson probably threatened in the 70's when Ibanez and others were making exact copies of the "open book" headstock and in the late 70's when Charvel and others were building Strat style guitars with Fender headstocks. Notice that Hamer Explorers have a larger and clunkier "hockey stick" headstock to advoid potential lawsuits and that Dean always used the old Futura split headstock:fingersx: I have noticed that some of the small guys do make double cream pickups......I think Wagner does in particular. Silly stuff. People in the music industry should be more worried about the Chinese ripoffs than who is having double cream in their pickup latte.:banana:
This would almost have to be a trade DRESS issue,not a trademark. The DiMarzio logo would be a trademark and include the trade name. The trade name protection may be what the argue for the use of PAF. Trade dress refers to a appearance of a product that cannot be specifically trademarked. Normally, the key to bringing an action is that someone elses use "causes confusion in the marketplace" This is slightly different than a blatant trademark/copyright infirngement case like Gibson probably threatened in the 70's when Ibanez and others were making exact copies of the "open book" headstock and in the late 70's when Charvel and others were building Strat style guitars with Fender headstocks. Notice that Hamer Explorers have a larger and clunkier "hockey stick" headstock to advoid potential lawsuits and that Dean always used the old Futura split headstock:fingersx: I have noticed that some of the small guys do make double cream pickups......I think Wagner does in particular. Silly stuff. People in the music industry should be more worried about the Chinese ripoffs than who is having double cream in their pickup latte.:banana:
frankfalbo
In Fluence Y'all
Re: Double Cream issue
There's not much to add to the Dimarzio double cream debate/rant. It comes up every once in awhile, but I would love to see that quote from LD saying he regrets the lawsuit(s). Everyone loved it when Darth Vader turned to the good side. As a society we embrace the repentant. That's why I think it would be good business if LD put out a press release basically saying "hey, anyone can make a double cream, don't worry about it" But in the past, he's always been a jerk about it. (Yes I have first-hand experience) It would definitely create some good will. I know people who won't touch a Dimarzio because of their business ethics. Spreading good will like that can only increase your market share. I guess they haven't figured that part out yet.
There's not much to add to the Dimarzio double cream debate/rant. It comes up every once in awhile, but I would love to see that quote from LD saying he regrets the lawsuit(s). Everyone loved it when Darth Vader turned to the good side. As a society we embrace the repentant. That's why I think it would be good business if LD put out a press release basically saying "hey, anyone can make a double cream, don't worry about it" But in the past, he's always been a jerk about it. (Yes I have first-hand experience) It would definitely create some good will. I know people who won't touch a Dimarzio because of their business ethics. Spreading good will like that can only increase your market share. I guess they haven't figured that part out yet.
pinto79
New member
Re: Double Cream issue
The Trademark is a US only thing. Double Cream pickups can be made in any other country and can usually still be marketed legally in the States, so long as they are not MADE in the USA...
Weird. Double cream looks good only in a few guitars, like gold-tops. Even then, Zebra looks better, IMO...
The Trademark is a US only thing. Double Cream pickups can be made in any other country and can usually still be marketed legally in the States, so long as they are not MADE in the USA...
Weird. Double cream looks good only in a few guitars, like gold-tops. Even then, Zebra looks better, IMO...