Double Cream not allowed anymore?

[Ed Hunter]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

:welcome: WHY IS THIS THREAD STILL GOING? two pages of statements that wont change a thing about the trademark dimarzio has. the more you talk about this the more it is likely that one day duncan wont be able to do DC anymore at all no matter what method the pup is ordered

 

[LtKojak]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

the more you talk about this the more it is likely that one day duncan wont be able to do DC anymore at all no matter what method the pup is ordered

This statement has absolutely no foundation...

Larry got the trademark. It is his forever and ever until the end of time. It's his RIGHT to enforce it with whatever means he see fit. That's the nature of the beast.

NOTHING can change that. So whatever you do or whatever you say has absolutely no effect over the fact as stated.

HTH,

 

[Aceman]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

See - I don't get this part of it (well - almost all of it really....): A SuperD is a DOUBLE CREAM and DOUBLE HEX pup. I see nothing wrong with Double hex pups or Double cream on their own.

I agree that no one would even care or know anymore. It's ridiculous. I'm never giving up my Ace Frehley SuperD's. However...this issue is really making me think hard about buying DiMarzio's ever again.

I want the sound more than the aesthetics. But - if it comes down to it...I can find a Duncan or Gibson or Fralin or GFS or whatever.

I do not support Dooshbaggery.

 

[AudioWonderland]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

This statement has absolutely no foundation...

Larry got the trademark. It is his forever and ever until the end of time. It's his RIGHT to enforce it with whatever means he see fit. That's the nature of the beast.

NOTHING can change that. So whatever you do or whatever you say has absolutely no effect over the fact as stated.

HTH,

Not really true. It could be challenged in court if anyone cared enough to do so and wanted to put up the cash

 

[Ed Hunter]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

This statement has absolutely no foundation...

Larry got the trademark. It is his forever and ever until the end of time. It's his RIGHT to enforce it with whatever means he see fit. That's the nature of the beast.

NOTHING can change that. So whatever you do or whatever you say has absolutely no effect over the fact as stated.

HTH,

yes i understand that but WHY bring it to light that many have found a way around his trademarks? DC is still obtainable from other companies, like carvin sells double cream and stew mac sells a parsons street paf that is DC under the cover, and they are a few more that ignore dimarzio and the trademark and get away wit it no prob because NO ONE mentions anything about it. silence can be bliss...

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

yes i understand that but WHY bring it to light that many have found a way around his trademarks? DC is still obtainable from other companies, like carvin sells double cream and stew mac sells a parsons street paf that is DC under the cover, and they are a few more that ignore dimarzio and the trademark and get away wit it no prob because NO ONE mentions anything about it. silence can be bliss...

I always wondered about the Carvin thing . . . there are tons of guitars sold by them that have double cream humbuckers:

Heck, SD does offer a double cream humbucker too technically:

Are these OK because there aren't 6 holes for slugs/screws in each of the bobbins?

 

[cvansickle]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

It's amazing to me how Dimarzio can enforce this trademark when they aren't even consistent with their own definition on "cream." A few years back, I built a Dave Murray tribute Strat and ordered Dimarzio's PAF and Super Distortion pickups for it, both in cream. They were clearly two different colors.

 

[Ed Hunter]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

It's amazing to me how Dimarzio can enforce this trademark when they aren't even consistent with their own definition on "cream." A few years back, I built a Dave Murray tribute Strat and ordered Dimarzio's PAF and Super Distortion pickups for it, both in cream. They were clearly two different colors.

Many vintage purist's wont use dimarzio's for this exact reason

 

[uOpt]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

It's amazing to me how Dimarzio can enforce this trademark when they aren't even consistent with their own definition on "cream." A few years back, I built a Dave Murray tribute Strat and ordered Dimarzio's PAF and Super Distortion pickups for it, both in cream. They were clearly two different colors.

For a while they used some "cream" plastic that had a very noticeable green hue. Very annoying if you put it next to real cream.

If people don't talk about this nobody will ever fix the stupid system. I cannot go trademark "a car in color #FF1743" either even if nobody else had that particular RGB value in use for 10 years.

 

[AudioWonderland]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

I always wondered about the Carvin thing . . . there are tons of guitars sold by them that have double cream humbuckers:

The 12 pole pieces is how they got around it I would imagine.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

Might be worth reading the actual text of the trademark. I don't know where to get that, for patents it's easy.

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

For a while they used some "cream" plastic that had a very noticeable green hue. Very annoying if you put it next to real cream.

Gibson has released some pink plastic parts (pickup rings and pickguards) and tried to convince people that it's cream . . . there doesn't seem to be a clear definition of what 'cream' is in the guitar world anyway.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

Gibson has released some pink plastic parts (pickup rings and pickguards) and tried to convince people that it's cream . . . there doesn't seem to be a clear definition of what 'cream' is in the guitar world anyway.

Oh there is.

"Cream" is whatever it looks like what you got in the last delivery from China.

 

[JOLLY]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

Goods and Services IC 015. US 036. G & S: Electronic Sound Pickup for Guitars. FIRST USE: 19740200. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19740200
Mark Drawing Code (2) DESIGN ONLY
Design Search Code 22.01.25 - Batons, orchestra conductor's; Bows, violin; Conductor's wands, batons; Drumsticks (musical instrument); Harmonicas; Instrument cases (musical); Music stands; Picks, guitar; Wands, conductors' and magicians'
26.11.27 - Oblongs not used as carriers for words, letters or designs
Serial Number 73150505
Filing Date December 1, 1977
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition June 23, 1981
Registration Number 1169205
Registration Date September 15, 1981
Owner (REGISTRANT) DiMarzio Musical Instrument Pickups, Inc. CORPORATION NEW YORK 643 Bay St. Staten Island NEW YORK 10304

(LAST LISTED OWNER) DIMARZIO, INC. CORPORATION BY ASSIGNMENT NEW YORK 1338 RICHMOND TERRACE PO BOX 100387 STATEN ISLAND NEW YORK 10310
Assignment Recorded ASSIGNMENT RECORDED
Description of Mark The mark comprises the double design representation of an electronic sound pickup for guitars, which is disclaimed apart from the mark as shown. AND IS LINED FOR THE COLOR YELLOW WHICH RESEMBLES THE DISTINCTIVE SHADE OF CREAM.
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL-2(F)
Affidavit Text SECT 15. SECT 8 (6-YR). SECTION 8(10-YR) 20010928.
Renewal 1ST RENEWAL 20010928
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

 

[uOpt]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

Hmmmm. Now I'm tempted to try it out.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=514&page=159

 

[King IzzO)))]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

I think the only way it gets changed is if Seymour decides he's losing out on business because of the double cream market. The legal costs for that endeavor are probably outweighing what they might gain in market share at this point.

Are double creams really that awesome? I only bought a DC liquifire because my Ironman is DC, I definitely would have picked a different color if I had ordered it new.

I don't think Dimarzios are substandard at all, and I like their neck pickups more than any Duncan I've found yet. You can bash the brass plates, and yeah, that's what comes on cheap import pickups, but it's also part of the dimarzio sound and why their A5 pickups have midrange.

Although I think the DC tm is kinda dumb, If I were spending a lot of time and effort on R&D with alternative designs like Steve and Larry have I would patent that sh!t too, just sayin'.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

Just to keep things into perspective, at least SD is still "allowed" by the mercy of Larry to make the best sounding pickups they want.

Here's what's going on elsewhere in the crazy land of Western intellectual property rights:

Barnes & Noble has answered [PDF] Microsoft's Complaint [PDF] against it for alleged patent infringement regarding it using Android in its Nook reader. It's a sizzler.
Microsoft has a scheme, Barnes & Noble asserts, to dominate Android and make it undesirable to device manufacturers and customers by demanding "exorbitant license fees and absurd licensing restrictions" -- a license fee that it says is more than Microsoft charges for its entire operating system for mobile devices, Windows 7. Others have, it believes, signed it. Barnes & Noble says the deal with Nokia is in furtherance of this scheme.

The patents asserted are "trivial, not infringed and invalid", Barnes & Noble says, and merely a vehicle in furtherance of the scheme, as they "are not even close to covering the entire functionality of Barnes & Noble’s NookTM and Nook ColorTM devices, or of the AndroidTM Operating System."

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110427052238659

%%

Applies tries to patent the whole idea of tracking your mobile phone explicitly on the phone, by the phone manufacturer.

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph...65".PGNR.&OS=DN/20110051665&RS=DN/20110051665


All these Java and/or Phone software patent lawsuits are mostly based on trivial ideas that the patent office let through since they don't have superstar programmers working for them. And the one paying the bill is - you suckers.

 

[King IzzO)))]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

Yep, and you're also paying for the lawsuits.

 

[Ayrton]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

I think the only way it gets changed is if Seymour decides he's losing out on business because of the double cream market.

Ding!

I doubt there is enough people who want DC Duncans to warrant the cost of a legal challenge.

As much as it is a PITA, I have bigger things to worry about.

 

[Kam]

Re: Double Cream not allowed anymore?

If I may interject with my completely useless opinion at this point -- Double creme humbuckers are ****ing ugly.