Question about DiMarizo creme patented

Xx DBENC xX

Xx DBENC xX

New member
Whats the story behind the creme humbucker patented that DiMarzio supposedly has. I was trying to find a creme JB to match my stock p/u's and learned that Duncan cant make one in creme.. Is this true and if so how long till the patented is up? :scratchch
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

Hey Xx DBENC xX, welcome to the User Group Forums. Actually, it's a trademark, not a patent. One of the big differences between the two is a trademark never expires.

DiMarzio's lawyer got a trademark on the Lipstick Tube Pickup for one of his other clients, WD Music. He used the same theory that DiMarzio used to get the trademark on double cream back in the '80s: acquired distinctiveness achieved through five years of continuous and exclusive use in commerce. As if WD was the only company selling Lipstick Tube pickups from 1995 to 1995 (sorry Danelectro, Charvel, Ibanez, Jerry Jones, Chandler and Seymour Duncan, I guess you don't exist).
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

Genius! There's always a loop hole! Thanks again bro! Shoulda joined this forum ages ago.
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

Evan Skopp said:
Hey Xx DBENC xX, welcome to the User Group Forums. Actually, it's a trademark, not a patent. One of the big differences between the two is a trademark never expires.

DiMarzio's lawyer got a trademark on the Lipstick Tube Pickup for one of his other clients, WD Music. He used the same theory that DiMarzio used to get the trademark on double cream back in the '80s: acquired distinctiveness achieved through five years of continuous and exclusive use in commerce. As if WD was the only company selling Lipstick Tube pickups from 1995 to 1995 (sorry Danelectro, Charvel, Ibanez, Jerry Jones, Chandler and Seymour Duncan, I guess you don't exist).
Click to expand...

Darn lawers! Could they just sell a creme p/u thats covered? :naughty:
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

There is a way around it, for Duncan and all other dealers. A technical loophole. I'll PM you how.
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

what I don't get is: why can other companies get away with it? Is it because Duncan is a big company or is it not international or what?
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

Xx DBENC xX said:
Whats the story behind the creme humbucker patented that DiMarzio supposedly has. I was trying to find a creme JB to match my stock p/u's and learned that Duncan cant make one in creme.. Is this true and if so how long till the patented is up? :scratchch
Click to expand...

It's not patented it's trademarked and won't be up anytime soon, they are renewable.
The only reason that LD has it is that Gibson was too stupid to apply for it to be protected, since they were doing them in the 50's when the supplier for the bobbins ran out of black occasionally.
 
Last edited:
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

does the trademark only apply to US companies?
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

Other companies like Carvin pay the licensing fee to Dimarzio. SD hasn't licensed the double creme trademark, so we don't get any pickups like that. I believe that it is due to Dimarzio wanting a ridiculous amount of money for the license.
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

nalo1022 said:
Other companies like Carvin pay the licensing fee to Dimarzio.
Click to expand...

I always thought that Carvin's double-cream bobbins were exempt because of the 22 poles. The main argument DiMarzio had was confusion. They argued that customers might become confused and might buy another vendor's double-cream humbucker; thinking it was a DiMarzio. Therefore, causing DiMarzio to lose a sale that would have been their's if the buyer wouldn't have mistaken the "brand X" pickup for theirs.

Carvin's 22-pole humbuckers, I would argue, would not be mistaken for a DiMarzio....
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

gdgt410.jpg



shhhhh..... not DMZ - don't tell.... :)
 
Re: Question about DiMarizo creme patented

Butch Snyder said:
I always thought that Carvin's double-cream bobbins were exempt because of the 22 poles. The main argument DiMarzio had was confusion. They argued that customers might become confused and might buy another vendor's double-cream humbucker; thinking it was a DiMarzio. Therefore, causing DiMarzio to lose a sale that would have been their's if the buyer wouldn't have mistaken the "brand X" pickup for theirs.

Carvin's 22-pole humbuckers, I would argue, would not be mistaken for a DiMarzio....
Click to expand...

Thats the stupidest ****ing thing ive ever heard in my life. Why don't they put the name of the company on there? oh yeah, then theyd argue some doofus would confuse them for SD.

fascists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top