Obsessive Compulsive
New member
Re: Gibson and Japanese Les Pauls
Les Paul may not be a brand, but didn't Les Paul the person license his name to Gibson exclusively? And he didn't like it when the company slapped his name on SG, then the company dropped it?
I think Les Paul as a type of guitar is colloquial, but not legally binding.
This post is not only ridiculous, it's ridiculously wrong!
"Les Paul" is not a brand that belongs to the Gibson family, it is a type of guitar, that is actually manufactured by some other companies even better than the ones made by Gibson.
Unplug that cork from your nose and get out in the real world some time. Heck, I've made a couple "Les Pauls" that are far superior to Gibsons.
Les Paul may not be a brand, but didn't Les Paul the person license his name to Gibson exclusively? And he didn't like it when the company slapped his name on SG, then the company dropped it?
I think Les Paul as a type of guitar is colloquial, but not legally binding.
