Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

Boogie Bill said:
Seems to me that Seymour Duncan or Gibson could hire a bunch lawyers and take DMZ to court and possibly win--if they wanted to. I can think of several arguments that I would use against DMZ in a trademark trial. So why don't they? Do they not have the $$$ to pursue such a suit? (I'm sure they do.)
Click to expand...

I explained that before. All that interllectual property mumbo-jumbo is in one legal basket. Trademarks, patents, copyright, licenses. The same lawyers handle all of this.

Abuse of the patent system in particular in industries that have vastly more money than the pickup making "industry", has driven demand for experienced lawyers in all of these area through the roof. You can calculate $600/hour for a known-good interllectual property lawyer. The software industry for example happily spends millions on single engagements. That's a lot of cream/cream humbuckers you gotta sell.

Then, as mentioned before, most of the uproar in the pickup industry comes from one particular lawyer who DiMarzio happens to hire.

These guys, you can very well name them predatory lawyers, cash in from some players in minor industries to make claims that they know the others players in the same industry won't fight about. As long as these one-sided claims go uncontested, the monthly predatory lawyer bill to DiMarzio is pretty small. It's like a poker playing printing his own cards, they can just do whatever they want since war isn't worth it.

Subsequently, the only solution is a boycott on part of the customers.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

I had the "pleasure" of getting a tour of the DMZ factory when my grandfather was looking for new accounts for scrap metal. Let me just say it was an experience to walk around there getting a tour of how everything was "made"... I didn't see everything, but the representatives who were giving me the tour were trying to win me over by offering me constant pickup samples. An area 67 here, a Super Distortion there... etc. There were some things there that they were working on that, as a guitarist, I was interested in getting a closer look. I asked how the airbuckers worked and how everything worked and each time I tried to take a quick little peek to see the structure, one of their guides would block the line of sight and be like "That's Patented!". I asked about the mismatched coil pickups and told them about the creme jobs, and rather than talk about the technology, I got more of a lesson in law than in how to make decent tone.

I called my grandfather up and said "don't go here, it's not worth the trouble". Apparently DMZ is so hard-up with having patents and trademarks that if they cannot have them, they will sue for them. I'm no lawyer so I don't know how long trademarks last, but I think it would be a fairly open and shut case if some of us with "JEMs" and "dragonforce signatures" and all sortsa pretty colored DiMarzio's got together and took up a trademark-lapse style suit. Does DMZ make double-creme pickups? Absolutely, but they no longer have the prominence in the line that they had in say... the late 70s / early 80s. I'm pretty sure with the protectiveness though that I saw at the DMZ factory, that Larry and co. have more than their fair share of attorneys (something Evan stated in a prior post), and he probably has them on his corporate payroll in some capacity. I think though there is a weakness, as Evan brought up in a premier guitar video.

Call me crazy, but if I recall correctly there is on premierguitar's website a section where Evan demonstrates the difference between a normal HB bobbin and the ones used for the Creme bobbins (not sure if it's restricted to the SH-55s that particular creme, or if it's used on all creme bobbins). The cream butyrate, has that distinctive smell that I do not think a DiMarzio double creme has, but a very early creme PAF from gibson would have. To a vintage PAF collector, especially those who specialize in creme collection, there would be that distinctive smell, and there's probably at least one person who could be considered an "expert" in a court case to sufficiently discern between the DMZ's and the SD's and the original 50's gibson jobs. If someone could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the material used played a significant role in the way the creme is, and could prove that because of the material, that either:

  1. Because of the material's inherent chemical properties the color of "creme butyrate" is distinct enough from DiMarzio creme to not be confused
  2. Because DiMarzio is increasingly associated with colors other than what it was initially associated with (double creme), and the act of double creme trademark enforcement has not been enforced in a way the average person would consider it enforced
Then perhaps it could be possible that the trademark could be considered overturned or just plain lapsed, and "double creme" could become a free color again in the USA. As for the BKP's in the UK, USA trademark law does not carry over to the UK, and IIRC, a color cannot be trademarked as easily, if at all, as it could be in the USA. But back on topic, one could have a chemist analyze the composition of the plastics used in an original creme PAF, a SD creme PAF / SH-55, and a DMZ double creme and use that as proof there is no intention of infringement, or to show that the double creme used by SD would be sufficiently different due to the inherent composition of the material that it wouldn't infringe. Would it be confusing between the 2 double creme types, perhaps... but within the intended audience (guitarists), I think the difference between DMZ and SD would be sufficient that with even a modicum of knowledge an educated decision could be made that would allow each company's audience to not be confused / misguided by the other company.

I think it may actually be pretty easy to de-trademark double creme, or at least make it so that cream butyrate double creme can be existent without a cover. It'd just take some chemistry, some experts in guitar vintage, and a little skullduggery to pull it off.

Jason
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

ganzosrevenge said:
I think it may actually be pretty easy to de-trademark double creme, or at least make it so that cream butyrate double creme can be existent without a cover. It'd just take some chemistry, some experts in guitar vintage, and a little skullduggery to pull it off.
Click to expand...
How long did it take PRS to its trademark infringement case with Gibson? We're talking about folks who argue that consumers in "smoky bars" can't tell the difference. I don't know how well your sniff test would work when it comes to trade dress.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

Wow. Five pages and class action lawsuits for something that can be worked around with a special order and a soldering iron. I had no idea there was this level of passion about the issue.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

aleclee said:
How long did it take PRS to its trademark infringement case with Gibson? We're talking about folks who argue that consumers in "smoky bars" can't tell the difference. I don't know how well your sniff test would work when it comes to trade dress.
Click to expand...

It took PRS a while to get their way, but couldn't part of a trade secret be the composition of the good? Now granted you'll open up a whole new can of worms with other color trademarks, such as the one with EVH's stripey job, but I think if we took the time to actually follow-through on Evan's claim with some original creme PAFs, that we could say that part of the trademark of the PAF is the stinky the material produces due to the material used. Think about it, we guitarists are constantly kvetching over how much of a difference nitro vs. poly makes as a wood covering, vintage block vs. modern block in the bridge, different string types, etc. Well... what's to say that for those with "Eric Johnson Tonal Nuance Syndrome", that the material wouldn't produce a discernible difference? There are some of us here who can tell the difference between 42 gauge and 43 gauge wire, some who can tell the difference between a stock strat bridge and a callaham strat bridge, what's to say someone here doesn't have a tuned olfactory detector and a tuned ear and could tell the difference based on smell and sound of a dimarzio double creme and a Seth Lover?

Certain things are distinctive, and have been used ACTIVELY since being trademarked (fender's headstock shapes come to mind), these things are actively protected not just by lawyers but by presence in the market, something the average person would understand. Joe Schmo can go to a Guitar Center, and would know just by what he sees in the media that a true stratocaster has a certain type of headstock, and knows that's a distinctive mark of a Fender Product. When we go look at dimarzio pickups, we see purpley, green, blue, orange, red, silver, but creme has not been given the same market presence. DMZ pickups are increasingly associated with "skittle colors" more than "traditional colors" and thus to an average person, they may not be able to piece together "double creme = dimarzio". I wonder though how much upholding a trademark by threatening to litigate the daylights out of everyone would really hold if someone, or some group, had the testicular fortitude to take DiMarzio on... we could bring modern day ads as "proof for the common man", and some seth lover pups and some dimarzio double cremes, and some original creme PAFs, and some experts on PAF history, etc.... an uphill battle it would be, but DiMarzio's own lack of "media presence" is what I think could tip the boat in favor of every other maker who's wanted to make an uncovered double creme.

Jason
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

ksmith63 said:
I have a Seymour Duncan Jazz that has a nickle cover, but double cream underneath.
Click to expand...

I've pulled the covers on my Seth's. One is double creme. The other is reverse zebra.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

BigJoe77 said:
Wow. Five pages and class action lawsuits for something that can be worked around with a special order and a soldering iron. I had no idea there was this level of passion about the issue.
Click to expand...

Because it is an abuse of the legal system, and it goes to our disadvantage. Seymour Duncan as a company probably doesn't suffer much from it, but we users do.

Some people don't just stick their head into the sand and reward the offender.

Also, there is a difference between the desired color being common, including on the used market, and having to special-order a pickup with a cover, which is extra $$$ and means wait time, plus more expensive shipping.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

I guess that's where I fail to see the abuse of the system. The system that protects DiMarzio's right to call double cream a distinctive pattern is the same one that protects Seymour Duncan's processes and marks.

Take the analogy of a sports team. You being in New England, how about the Hartford Whalers. They have since moved to North Carolina and become the Hurricanes. Different home, different colors, different mascot, different everything. However, they still own the rights to the Hartford Whalers name, color scheme and logos. And they protect the heck out of it from anyone that tries to use them. The Harftford Whalers have no practical connection or tie to the current NHL. Consumers are also disadvantaged because they can no longer get the same selection of hats, jerseys, t-shirts, etc. with their favorite team logo on it.

However, neither the Whalers or Dimarzio cases are ones that warrant the overturn of copyright laws. Continuous usage has little bearing on it. Continuous protection has everything to do with it.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

BigJoe77 said:
I guess that's where I fail to see the abuse of the system. The system that protects DiMarzio's right to call double cream a distinctive pattern is the same one that protects Seymour Duncan's processes and marks.
Click to expand...

Because the color pattern trademarked is too basic.

Furthermore, since Gibson humbuckers had black and cream coils randomly with thousands of pickups made it is obvious that there was prior art.

BigJoe77 said:
Take the analogy of a sports team. You being in New England, how about the Hartford Whalers. They have since moved to North Carolina and become the Hurricanes. Different home, different colors, different mascot, different everything. However, they still own the rights to the Hartford Whalers name, color scheme and logos. And they protect the heck out of it from anyone that tries to use them. The Harftford Whalers have no practical connection or tie to the current NHL. Consumers are also disadvantaged because they can no longer get the same selection of hats, jerseys, t-shirts, etc. with their favorite team logo on it.

However, neither the Whalers or Dimarzio cases are ones that warrant the overturn of copyright laws. Continuous usage has little bearing on it. Continuous protection has everything to do with it.
Click to expand...

These are much more complex artists patterns, and with no prior art.

Namely, the logo on there changes everything. Of course you can put a trademark on a logo. What kind of comparison is this?

Having wrote this answer, I think if you really don't get, or pretend not to get the difference between a basic color and a designed logo, then you are just a troll playing for the minds of the more innocent forum members.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

uOpt said:
Because it is an abuse of the legal system, and it goes to our disadvantage. Seymour Duncan as a company probably doesn't suffer much from it, but we users do.
Click to expand...

I don't see how the legal system is being abused.

I don't see how we users are suffering.

Bill
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

ganzosrevenge said:
It took PRS a while to get their way, but couldn't part of a trade secret be the composition of the good? Now granted you'll open up a whole new can of worms with other color trademarks, such as the one with EVH's stripey job, but I think if we took the time to actually follow-through on Evan's claim with some original creme PAFs, that we could say that part of the trademark of the PAF is the stinky the material produces due to the material used.
Click to expand...
You might want to familiarize yourself with the concept of trade dress. Not to be cliché but the trademark is was it is and it's all about the color. Not the smell. Not the composition. Not the brand of the winder's underwear.

The trademark was granted because, at the time, double cremes were a "Dimarzio thing". The made a case to the PTO that when people saw double cremes, they thought of Dimarzio. The fact that Gibson had double cremes under covers 50 years ago is a non-issue because...they were under covers. As a result, nobody associated double creme with Gibby. Coming up with a subtly different creme color probably won't cut it because, unlike patents, trademarks have built-in wiggle room to preclude knock-offs (e.g., Chinese "Gibsun" script logos). If another product has the identifying feature and it is likely to confuse people looking for the "real thing", that's when people are gonna start losing lawsuits.

I'm not about to defend the USPTO 'cause it does a lot to bring grief upon itself but these rules are pretty well understood. They do get abused with unfortunate regularity (patents moreso than trademarks) but that's the way it goes. Sadly, the legislative climate of the past couple decades seems to be tilting things even more in favor of the folks who have dubiously staked out their intellectual property.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

Not trying to be a troll. I'm mostly referring to this concept:

aleclee said:
The trademark was granted because, at the time, double cremes were a "Dimarzio thing". The made a case to the PTO that when people saw double cremes, they thought of Dimarzio. The fact that Gibson had double cremes under covers 50 years ago is a non-issue because...they were under covers. As a result, nobody associated double creme with Gibby.
Click to expand...

Regardless of if it would pass the test today, they've continued to protect it so it's still theirs. And because they still own it, there's no difference between that and an artist designed logo in the eyes of the enforcers.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

bryan the rocker said:
Use bobbin toppers if you want colored bobbins.
Click to expand...

+ 1.

Only four bucks or less in most music shops.

No waiting for a special order.

No looking over your shoulder for Di Marzio's lawyers.

End of thread.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

I think the only way to attack this is on the grounds of trademarking a color. DiMarzio may argue, even persuasively, that it's not just a color, it's a color + pattern (the shape of two bobbins together), e.g., a logo which is the essence of a trademark. That would be trickier to debunk but there's gotta be a way.

My dream is to trademark double-black and zebra, which theoretically could be done, and then license it to every winder in the world for a $1 a year...except DiMarzio.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

Boogie Bill said:
I don't see how the legal system is being abused.

I don't see how we users are suffering.

Bill
Click to expand...

If you don't want double creme humbuckers as easily available as black or zebra then of course not. I happen to like that color pattern.

Trademarking a color like this, with no company logo, with no writing, with no special shape (the bobbins are shaped the same as with all other makers) is clearly not a valid trademark. The only reason they get away with it is that nobody has the cash to sue. This is a clear abuse of intellectual property laws and the best thing to do about it is a boycott on part of the user.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

I believe this thread to be worthy of the vault!
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

uOpt said:
Trademarking a color like this, with no company logo, with no writing, with no special shape (the bobbins are shaped the same as with all other makers) is clearly not a valid trademark.
Click to expand...

Clearly is IS valid as a trademark--otherwise the trademark would not have been granted.


uOpt said:
The only reason they get away with it is that nobody has the cash to sue. This is a clear abuse of intellectual property laws and the best thing to do about it is a boycott on part of the user.
Click to expand...

I'd bet Seymour has enough bucks to sue. I don't think he WANTS to.

And I don't see how you can argue that it is an abuse of intellectual property laws. DiMarzio established the intellectual property by filing the trademark, and the trademark was granted.

You have a very strong emotional argument, but I fail to see the logic.

Bill
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

Boogie Bill said:
Clearly is IS valid as a trademark--otherwise the trademark would not have been granted.
Click to expand...

Uh? Invalid patents and trademarks are granted and revoked all the time. The people working in these agencies get $8/hour and grant a lot of things that shouldn't be granted.

Boogie Bill said:
I'd bet Seymour has enough bucks to sue. I don't think he WANTS to.
Click to expand...

With the prices for doing so driven up to the levels they have?

Anyway...

You just don't have any concept of what this field is like. Somehow you seem to have the concept of a god-like unfailable entity granting trademarks and that you just pay $40 for the small claims court to challenge one.
 
Re: Really, is there ANYTHING that can be done about Dimarzio's double creme patent?

Hey guys, let's play nice. I only posted because I know the pickup I want to try and I can't get it in the color I want. I even emailed the custom shop and they referred me to a dealer! For all of you who say "bobbin toppers" and "who wants creme anyway" or "this thread is baloney", well I want the double creme and I'm not putting bobbin toppers on a Les Paul Custom. It may look okay, but I would know they're there if you know what I mean. Again, I don't care about all of this legal stuff. I'm just a dumb old fool who can't understand how somebody "trademarked" an existing color/color scheme--that had been done before by someone else as well. I don't care why, I don't care how, I don't care if it is COMPLETELY legal, I just don't get it. No explainations needed because it's not going to get through my thick skull, plus I don't care. I want a darn Alnico Pro II in double creme and this trademark is making it extremely difficult to get and that is really all I understand or care about. All the legalities and reasons have been explained very clearly in this post, and I sincerely thank everyone for explaining it, but it doesn't change my darn problem, which compared to the rest of my problems is so small that it's not even worth discussing--but gosh darnit, I'm gonna discuss it. :naughty:

Whew! :28:
.
.
.
.
.
.
On a lighter note, you guys are definitely the most passionate group I've ever seen, and that's what makes this my favorite forum, period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top