Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

[Gearjoneser]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

They'd better trademark these before all the companies start making copies!:18:

 

[Falloffthebonetone]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA I remember that thing.

 

[Luke Duke]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

They'd better trademark these before all the companies start making copies!:18:

AGHHHH

My eyes, MY EYES!

 

[SirJackdeFuzz]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

I really wish Gibson would just drop all the min e tune and weight relief and signature models and lawsuits and just put all those resources towards quality control and getting a few market research panels of REAL guitarists to occasionally figure out what customers really want and what they complain about.

If they just made good guitars at modest prices wouldn't the guitars basically sell themselves? Why do they have to try everything BUT that?

If someone copies a 335 and I were Gibson, who cares, don't I have the resources to make mine really good and affordable, while carrying the original brand name?

Do they ask WHY people are making copies?

Some are because people are trying to ride the look of a popular model. But some are making them because they feel they have improved upon the current state of the product they are copying. Why can't Gibson just be dedicated to making KILLER 335s and let them sell themselves? This is the internet age. A good review gets around.

I can give you three reasons.

1) PRICE

2) PRICE

3) PRICE


Because someone like Tokai can make an ES-335 and sell it for 1/3 of the Gibson asking price.

And lets face it, Tokai is brilliant value for money.

 

[Rich_S]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

It's not just cheaper, better value look-a likes, though. Collins is building some nice guitars that look an awful lot like 335s.

The problem I have with this is that Henry et al keep trying to move a goal posts. Years ago, everybody sort of settled into a detente, where outright copies were prevented based on the name applied, and the peg head shape. It wasn't a perfect system, but Gibson and Fender had been slow to defend their body shapes, and kind of let the cats out of the bag.

Lately though, ol' Henry's been upping ante, forcing the low-end brands like Agile to make their "single-cutaway, dual-humbucker, set-neck, carved-top solid body guitars" to look more like potatoes. I personally feel that he should settle for the old peg head status quo, and stop looking like a whiny baby. Stop fighting competitors with similar offerings by making your guitars better (or better value) than theirs.

If, after a long day of making high-quality, high-value guitars, you're still spoiling for an IP fight, band together with everybody else who's had an original or evolutionary idea, and go after the Chinese. Those guys simply don't feel obligated to play by everyone else's rules, and feel no shame in copying the whole thing: body shape, peg head, and then slapping Gibson's, or Fender's, or Ibanez's name and logo on an outright counterfeit. This kind of behavior is far more egregious than anything Agile or Collings does, and as victims, Gibson, Fender, Ibanez, PRS (even Xotic and Mad Professor) have way more in common than the differences Henry keeps whining about .

 

[ImmortalSix]

Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

No actually they didnt. Well ok to be clear they were granted and injunction against PRS but this was eventually overturned. In the end Gibsons own lawyers did them no favors they even said that at the point of sale "only an idiot" would confuse the PRS for a Gibson (Gibsons lawyers were arguing that in a smokey bar room someone might mistake them)

I never understood that. I'm a huge guitar nerd who has owned both Les Pauls and PRS Singlecuts, and I could easily mistake one for the other in a barroom.

Full disclosure: I very well may be an idiot

 

[LtKojak]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

As the TM will only be applied in US soil, preventing only another US company, exactly to what maker do you think is Gibson going after? Heritage? Collings?

I mean, world's biggest sellers of 335-like guitars are Ibanez and Epiphone. Both are overseas and one is even a Gibson-owned company, so I don't really get what they're trying to accomplish here.

Evan, any further thoughts?

 

[Aceman]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

There is no need to Gibson bash. A simple statement of the actions is sufficient to reveal all of the foolishness and business dumb@$$ery involved.

I get there point, but the real thing this will do is push other companies to modify and dare I say INNOVATE, while Gibson tries to milk the last 1/2 cent possible out of 50 year old designs that while Iconic, have been public domain for 50 years.

I mentioned this in a different thread somewhere about a Stompbox. Suhr will not lose one Penny from me over the Suhr Riot when I get a Joyo US Dream. For $200 I am not buying a distortion pedal. Not now, not ever. So you can lawyer up all you want - for untold $100k's of attorney dollars, you are probably saving $2k in profits.

Gibson is likely even worse. I'm not spending $2.5k on a 335. Not now, not ever. Might drop $250 on an Epiphone Dot (but Gibson gets that money anyway).

I really do not think that the average, or even 99% clone buyer is saying "Hey - I WOULD have bought a 335, but this Ibby is the same thing." They are people like me that say "Hey - for 3 bills I'll grab a semi" If it were $3k though, they would go right on living their lives without it.

This is the thinking of a Profit/Loss guy without any real music knowledge-interest. The bottom line is, and I have been saying this about a LOT of "Icon" industries, is that they eventually move on to pricing themselves out of their own market. These are the kind of things they do to hold onto ridiculous profic margins against a world of progress.

Guys who NEED a 335 get them. Guys who don't, don't. The difference between guys who might grab one if cheap enough and guys who need them is HUGE. Bottom line you are going to war with people who really are NOT your market, and at your price point, won't ever be. Most Camry buyers are not butthurt non-Lexus owners. They are people who buy a Camry because a car just isn't worth what Lexus charges. Toyota gets it. Most will only pay so much. And then they will buy something else. But if you want to pay more, they have an option. You don't do "Let's force everyone to pay more or not have it at all" because they will go elsewhere - except a very few.

Again - not bashing. More power to Gibson if they can get a "cut" of everyones 335 business. Hella way to make big money easy. What I predict though, is that designs modernize and change sufficiently to avoid the law, new buyers go cheap, and they lose business as opposed to gain, and end up raising prices to maintain margin on the reduced sales. And that prices even more people out of the market. And the cycle starts over. Over time they will end up reducing their own market.

We'll see.

 

[Evan Skopp]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

Evan, any further thoughts?

Oh, I have plenty, especially after speaking in detail with the attorney who's prosecuting the challenge against Gibson on behalf of several guitar builders with the exception of FMIC (he also happens to be Inside Track's lawyer). The problem is, none of those further thoughts are appropriate for discussion in a public forum. Come to the next UGD--I know it's a long trip--and we'll have a drink or two and I'll spill the beans.

 

[LtKojak]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

Come to the next UGD--I know it's a long trip--and we'll have a drink or two and I'll spill the beans.

I wish I could afford such a trip.

My dream is to be able share a meal in a table with Frank Falbo, you, MJ and Seymour, together with Bill Megela of Electric City Pickups and Wolfe MacLeod, of Wolfetone Pickups in an open discussion about the music business in general.

Reality is that right now I'm threading very carefully just to avoid become homeless again. And no, I'm actually NOT joking.

 

[Evan Skopp]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

Good luck with your situation. I'm sending positive thoughts your way.

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

What's curious to me is they just went after the 335 shape. The Les Paul and V, among a few others, seem more distinctly Gibson to me. Makes we wonder if they are just testing the trademark waters with the 335, and only if successful will they go after the more obvious/known/valuable Gibson shapes.

 

[hydro]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

Collings has a dog in this fight. The name of their "clone", the I-35, riffs on 335 and the name of the main interstate running through Austin where they are made.

Quick story - saw Rich Brotherton from the Robert Earl Keen band playing what I assumed was a 335; I was in the balcony and my eyes aren't the best. I wasn't sure though, and researched it and found out it was a Collings. It sounded SO damn good.

I have loved the 335 style guitar since I was a child and finally bought one a few years ago. Long story short, there were quality problems: Gibson made it right and sent me a new one. It's a great guitar but still has some setup/playability issues.

Personally I would love to try out a Collings because I suspect they may be doing a better 335 than the originator. They fetch a high price too, and are in the same market/price/perceived quality segment as the custom shop Gibson 335s.

I'll say this - there are a lot of guys who just have to have Gibson and I'm not gonna lie, I am one of them. But if I was going to get another new 335 style guitar, a Collings would be the first one I would look at. And if I was a bad ass touring pro like Brotherton, well I'd go for a player's instrument over the name on the headstock. That to me is the real threat Gibson sees - high profile players abandoning their top-end guitars for higher quality clones. From a strategic perspective, they probably see it as protecting their flagship line.

The right/wrong of it? I don't know - I own 3 doublecut semihollows, they are all totally different guitars in terms of looks, tone, personality, etc. But it seems pretty obvious that Collings is saying "We can make a better 335 than Gibson". Gibson may have the right to defend their IP, but that IP slipped away from them ages ago and I think they would be better off spending their time and money on improving quality and workmanship, than on trying to assert a dubious claim on a design that has been copied and reworked by countless companies worldwide over several decades.

 

[DreX]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

The 335 and LP look goofy when they are slightly wrong. See Heritage.

I wonder if that's because we expect them to look a certain way, or if they really are goofy, maybe due to some lack of balance in the proportions or something like that. When they originally designed those classic guitars, they tweaked the lines until it looked good. They did't just draw a big, random circle, plop the knobs wherever, and say that's the way it's going to be.

 

[dr. ad]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

not sure how it works in the US, but legal privilege in australia can only be waived by the client...

 

[DreX]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

I get there point, but the real thing this will do is push other companies to modify and dare I say INNOVATE, while Gibson tries to milk the last 1/2 cent possible out of 50 year old designs that while Iconic, have been public domain for 50 years.
...
Gibson is likely even worse. I'm not spending $2.5k on a 335. Not now, not ever. Might drop $250 on an Epiphone Dot (but Gibson gets that money anyway).
...

Gibson must have done some market research at some point and figured that a $400 Korean made Gibson would damage their brand image, like the Martin Shenandoah, so they have to call it Epiphone to keep the premium marque removed from the budget line. I'm willing to bet that the majority of hobby guitarists who can afford luxury guitars are not kids, they're nostalgic middle aged men who don't want a new designs, unless it's something like min-e-tune, more a tacky convenience than an innovation. Nostalgia can't last forever, though. The days of guitar heroes are behind us. At some point the well will run dry. Maybe then we're start seeing the Gibson name show up on $400 Korean bangers.

I mentioned this in a different thread somewhere about a Stompbox. Suhr will not lose one Penny from me over the Suhr Riot when I get a Joyo US Dream. For $200 I am not buying a distortion pedal. Not now, not ever. So you can lawyer up all you want - for untold $100k's of attorney dollars, you are probably saving $2k in profits.

They way I look at spending money is: will I be proud of this purchase some day when I retire, living on a fixed in income and wishing I had maybe instead saved the money? In 20 - 30 years will I be proud of having spent an extra $100 - $200 to make some kind of vague moral statement about the origin of a product I've long since tossed in a box? Absolutely not. Would it wrong to fault the boutique makers for not having made their pedals made in Chine to begin with? Why make them domestically at all?

 

[Agileguy_101]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

They way I look at spending money is: will I be proud of this purchase some day when I retire, living on a fixed in income and wishing I had maybe instead saved the money? In 20 - 30 years will I be proud of having spent an extra $100 - $200 to make some kind of vague moral statement about the origin of a product I've long since tossed in a box? Absolutely not. Would it wrong to fault the boutique makers for not having made their pedals made in Chine to begin with? Why make them domestically at all?

I will always be proud of my decision to support domestic manufacturing. Anyone who doesn't, regardless of whether they're American, British, Chinese, Indonesian, or otherwise, is unpatriotic. It's really that simple - supporting US made products keeps jobs here.

 

[DreX]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

I will always be proud of my decision to support domestic manufacturing. Anyone who doesn't, regardless of whether they're American, British, Chinese, Indonesian, or otherwise, is unpatriotic. It's really that simple - supporting US made products keeps jobs here.

Why guitar pedals and not toaster ovens? We already buy lots of things and pay for lots of services that are 100% domestic. When the boutique makers ask of us is almost like charity, and I'd appreciate a solid reason as to why they feel they are deserving of exception.

 

[darthphineas]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

not sure how it works in the US, but legal privilege in australia can only be waived by the client...

dr. ad, do you think that would be applicable to this situation?

 

[frankfalbo]

Re: Gibson Trademarks 335 Shape

An apropos story to lighten the mood:

The Deaf Italian Bookkeeper:

A Mafia Godfather finds out that his bookkeeper, Guido, has cheated him out of $10,000,000.00. His bookkeeper is deaf. That was the reason he got the job in the first place. It was assumed that Guido would hear nothing and would therefore never have to testify in court.

When the Godfather goes to confront Guido about the missing $10 million, he takes along his lawyer, who knows sign language. The Godfather tells the lawyer, "Ask him where the money is." The lawyer, using sign language, asks Guido, Where's the money?

Guido signs back, "I don't know what you are talking about." The lawyer tells the Godfather, "He says, He doesn't know what you are talking about."

The Godfather pulls out a pistol, puts it to Guido's head and says, "Ask him again or I'll kill him!" The lawyer signs to Guido, "He'll kill you if you don't tell him."

Guido trembles and signs back, "OK! You win! The money is in a brown briefcase, buried behind the Shed at my cousin Bruno's house."

The Godfather asks the lawyer, "What did he say?"

The lawyer replies, "He says you don't have the balls to pull the trigger."

Don't you just love lawyers?