Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

[jmcorey]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

^ Yeah, probably. I mostly did it for demonstration purposes. That was one coat on the cover. I'll see if I can post some pics in the future. I think I will be "aging" some parchment duncans that I have.

I'd love to see the results of that; has to be safer than inserting a pickup into a cup of coffee for 2 days.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

It's a crock for DiMarzio anyway. A few years back, I ordered a PAF neck and Super Distortion bridge for a Dave Murray project guitar I was putting together. I ordered both pickups dual cream. When they arrived, it was perfectly obvious that the two pickups were different colors.

Yeah, inconsistent shades of cream are DiMarzio, too. And if you think that's bad try to put them inside a cream humbucker ring also branded as DiMarzio.

You'd think the color trademark would at least restrict the nonsense to a specific shade of cream...

 

[AlexR]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

^ Exit stage left???

 

[uOpt]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

wut?

 

[uOpt]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

I can post pictures of different DiMarzio products and their cream shades. In summary - LOL.

The humbucker pickup rings are also special. It's nice that they are the highest in the industry so that you can (maybe) mount a short leg hummelbucker in the bridge position of a Les Paul. But the cream color matches no cream color humbucker I have.

And although the DiMarzio rings are the most expensive ones (I can have Gibson CS cheaper from sweetwater) they are the only ones not shipping with screws. That's double troube nice because, as I mentioned, the bridge ring from DiMarzio is the highest you can get - which means normal length screws won't mount it.

 

[Johnny the Kid]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

What gets me about this is that several people have made some great points yet you don't seem to have learned anything from it because you continue on and on ranting. Look here man if Dimarzio disappeared off of the face of the Earth tomorrow then it wouldn't affect me as long as there are other good pickup makers around, but it is an irritating thing when people criticize in especially offensive ways based on perceptions that are arguable at best. I could think of any number of legitimate complaints which will be almost impossible for anyone to argue such as things regarding insurance companies, banks, utility companies, government, and so on. Dimarzio got a patent on a color which by account still makes the brand recognizable by some people after however many years. Big deal time to move on. It obviously hasn't hurt Seymour's business and if Seymour Duncan cared anything about that they would have found a way around it a long time ago. You could choose from any number of industry standard pantone colors similar enough to cream and then the patent would be a non issue.

From other places I've read (The Gear Page, Gear Sluts, and even IGN), it appears that DMZ does consistently have inconsistencies between their cream color pickups.

Yes, the trademark is perfectly legal. We're just questioning the validity of a trademark color on a single part of a guitar. If Gibson can lose the trademark on the Les Paul body style, then there's no reason to believe DMZ shouldn't lose the trademark on double cream pickups.

 

[AlexR]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

^ Especially since the emergence of a lot of PAF clone winders and the lack of restrictions they have unless they wind in the US (and even then the small winders usually fly under the radar).

 

[Stickymongoose]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

I never realized DiMarzio operated like this. I'll probably still buy some of the single coil models, but it's a real disappointment. I can't imagine they pull in more sales with exclusive colors and PAF markings than they lose by acting so dickish. It's not like either is seen as an exclusively DiMarzio trait. If you saw someone marketing a cream colored "PAF clone", could you really accuse them of trying to rip off DiMarzio? I could maybe see it with something that is immediately recognizable as THAT company. If Orange trademarked tolex in that particular shade of orange (which I don't think they do), I could see that. This just seems like sleazy, shady business tactics. If Apple did pickups, this is how they would operate.

 

[Johnny the Kid]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

I never realized DiMarzio operated like this. I'll probably still buy some of the single coil models, but it's a real disappointment. I can't imagine they pull in more sales with exclusive colors and PAF markings than they lose by acting so dickish. It's not like either is seen as an exclusively DiMarzio trait. If you saw someone marketing a cream colored "PAF clone", could you really accuse them of trying to rip off DiMarzio? I could maybe see it with something that is immediately recognizable as THAT company. If Orange trademarked tolex in that particular shade of orange (which I don't think they do), I could see that. This just seems like sleazy, shady business tactics. If Apple did pickups, this is how they would operate.

It's seen as an exclusively DMZ Trait because DMZ is the only company that is allowed to make them. They do make some more sales by "forcing" players who are after a certain look to buy DMZ pickups to attain that look (Ace Frehley's Budokan Les Paul for instance was originally intended to have three double cream SD pups).

The only people who would accuse a company of ripping off DMZ would be DMZ and their users.

Orange does not have a trademark for that particular shade of orange (it's easily acquired on the internet or at least a shade that looks incredibly close), but they do have a trademark on what they refer to as "basket weave" grill cloth.

I believe DMZ also owns the trademark for PAF and from what I read, at one point tried to acquire a trademark for chrome covered humbuckers.

If Apple made pickups, they would force every manufacturer to pay for licensing fees to advertise that guitars were designed to be used with the iPickups. And then once everyone had gotten their new Apple iSuper Distortion pickups, they would force certain aspects of the guitar to become obsolete (by changing the way they connect to the guitar for instance) there by forcing every player who wants to put a new set of them into their guitar to buy all new pots or switches from Apple that are designed for the new iPAF 5's Lightning connection system. This would continue until a small company named Google Music decided they would going to design the pickup winds and sounds and then allow other companies to use those designs. The Google Pickups are much better made but somewhat lack the widespread support that the Apple Pickups have. The Samsung Galaxies are among the most popular of the Android pickups.

 

[Myaccount876]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

It's seen as an exclusively DMZ Trait because DMZ is the only company that is allowed to make them. They do make some more sales by "forcing" players who are after a certain look to buy DMZ pickups to attain that look (Ace Frehley's Budokan Les Paul for instance was originally intended to have three double cream SD pups).

The only people who would accuse a company of ripping off DMZ would be DMZ and their users.

Orange does not have a trademark for that particular shade of orange (it's easily acquired on the internet or at least a shade that looks incredibly close), but they do have a trademark on what they refer to as "basket weave" grill cloth.

I believe DMZ also owns the trademark for PAF and from what I read, at one point tried to acquire a trademark for chrome covered humbuckers.

If Apple made pickups, they would force every manufacturer to pay for licensing fees to advertise that guitars were designed to be used with the iPickups. And then once everyone had gotten their new Apple iSuper Distortion pickups, they would force certain aspects of the guitar to become obsolete (by changing the way they connect to the guitar for instance) there by forcing every player who wants to put a new set of them into their guitar to buy all new pots or switches from Apple that are designed for the new iPAF 5's Lightning connection system. This would continue until a small company named Google Music decided they would going to design the pickup winds and sounds and then allow other companies to use those designs. The Google Pickups are much better made but somewhat lack the widespread support that the Apple Pickups have. The Samsung Galaxies are among the most popular of the Android pickups.

You're forgetting that when DiMarzio first started out, they were the only way to get double cream humbuckers, because they were the only ones making them. Gibson had long stopped using double cream bobbins, and there were no other pickup manufacturers. I don't even think you could get black DiMarzio pickups back then - they only came in double cream. They didn't have any trademarks for two years, so double cream actually was an exclusive DiMarzio trait before they had a trademark.

 

[regan]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

If Apple made pickups, they would force every manufacturer to pay for licensing fees to advertise that guitars were designed to be used with the iPickups. And then once everyone had gotten their new Apple iSuper Distortion pickups, they would force certain aspects of the guitar to become obsolete (by changing the way they connect to the guitar for instance) there by forcing every player who wants to put a new set of them into their guitar to buy all new pots or switches from Apple that are designed for the new iPAF 5's Lightning connection system. This would continue until a small company named Google Music decided they would going to design the pickup winds and sounds and then allow other companies to use those designs. The Google Pickups are much better made but somewhat lack the widespread support that the Apple Pickups have. The Samsung Galaxies are among the most popular of the Android pickups.

Uh?
:wrf::wrf:

 

[treyhaislip]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

While I do think its ridiculous to Trademark a color you didn't create nor were the first to use, I have to say making him out as a bad guy is over the top. I never associated double cream as a DiMarzio only thing BUT I was born in '88 and by the time I even started playing guitar many after market manufactures had already come onto the scene. He did in fact file a trademark and it was granted to him–if other manufacturers thought it was worthwhile to challenge, they would. Simple as that. But villifiying him for being a shrewd business man (think about Thomas Edison before making DMZ to be this terrible money hungry villain) is over the top.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

He did in fact file a patent and it was granted to him–if other manufacturers thought it was worthwhile to challenge, they would. Simple as that.

Trademark, not patent. Challenging a trademark or patent in court is undoable for anybody but large corporations. The lawyers prices for IP lawsuits are astronomical. Yes you can bet the office that they please declare themselves incompetent (and I think SD did), but that doesn't often work.

But villifiying him for being a shrewd business man (think about Thomas Edison before making DMZ to be this terrible money hungry villain) is over the top.

No, he is sitting on the trademark hiding behind the high litigation cost, not the validity of the trademark.

In addition we can't bring congress to clarify color trademarks in the US, similar to clarifications the Europeans do have.

There is nothing non-****** about any of this. And you say yourself, when you came around the visual feel that double creme is DiMarzio was already gone. Then Larry could treat it like an actual patent and give up on it after an expiration period. You want to challenge you go to court.

 

[treyhaislip]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

Trademark, not patent. Challenging a trademark or patent in court is undoable for anybody but large corporations. The lawyers prices for IP lawsuits are astronomical. Yes you can bet the office that they please declare themselves incompetent (and I think SD did), but that doesn't often work.



No, he is sitting on the trademark hiding behind the high litigation cost, not the validity of the trademark.

In addition we can't bring congress to clarify color trademarks in the US, similar to clarifications the Europeans do have.

There is nothing non-****** about any of this. And you say yourself, when you came around the visual feel that double creme is DiMarzio was already gone. Then Larry could treat it like an actual patent and give up on it after an expiration period. You want to challenge you go to court.

Ooops, I definitely meant trademark–corrected my post.

We will have to disagree man, if Seymour or Gibson or anyone else thought it was profitable and worthwhile then they would challenge it. He got the trademark for his product–why should he NOT use the protection offered by said Trademark?? That's the whole point of getting a Trademark. Do you vilify Dr. Pepper for suing Coke over Dr. Pibb (Coke subsequently changed it to Mr. Pibb)?

I do agree only those with deep pockets can challenge such things as the legal process in America will cost you a pretty penny. But again, if other pickup manufacturers thought it was worthwhile and profitable they would challenge it in court.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

Ooops, I definitely meant trademark–corrected my post.

We will have to disagree man, if Seymour or Gibson or anyone else thought it was profitable and worthwhile then they would challenge it. He got the trademark for his product–why should he NOT use the protection offered by said Trademark?? That's the whole point of getting a Trademark. Do you vilify Dr. Pepper for suing Coke over Dr. Pibb (Coke subsequently changed it to Mr. Pibb)?

I do agree only those with deep pockets can challenge such things as the legal process in America will cost you a pretty penny. But again, if other pickup manufacturers thought it was worthwhile and profitable they would challenge it in court.

At $600/hour for a intellectual property lawyer? I want to see you convince the CEO of a SD-sized company to go for that adventure, for virtually zero increase in revenue or profits.

 

[RockinRollur]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

From other places I've read (The Gear Page, Gear Sluts, and even IGN), it appears that DMZ does consistently have inconsistencies between their cream color pickups.

Yes, the trademark is perfectly legal. We're just questioning the validity of a trademark color on a single part of a guitar. If Gibson can lose the trademark on the Les Paul body style, then there's no reason to believe DMZ shouldn't lose the trademark on double cream pickups.

You can speculate all you want but this is the actual trademark.

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 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
Attorney of Record Ronald S. Bienstock
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) 20110429.
Renewal 2ND RENEWAL 20110429
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

I never realized DiMarzio operated like this. I'll probably still buy some of the single coil models, but it's a real disappointment. I can't imagine they pull in more sales with exclusive colors and PAF markings than they lose by acting so dickish. It's not like either is seen as an exclusively DiMarzio trait. If you saw someone marketing a cream colored "PAF clone", could you really accuse them of trying to rip off DiMarzio? I could maybe see it with something that is immediately recognizable as THAT company. If Orange trademarked tolex in that particular shade of orange (which I don't think they do), I could see that. This just seems like sleazy, shady business tactics. If Apple did pickups, this is how they would operate.

Yeah great idea so now consider Dimarzio is the bad guy because fanboys from a competing brand told you so.

You're forgetting that when DiMarzio first started out, they were the only way to get double cream humbuckers, because they were the only ones making them. Gibson had long stopped using double cream bobbins, and there were no other pickup manufacturers. I don't even think you could get black DiMarzio pickups back then - they only came in double cream. They didn't have any trademarks for two years, so double cream actually was an exclusive DiMarzio trait before they had a trademark.

Finally some sense.
++

Trademark, not patent. Challenging a trademark or patent in court is undoable for anybody but large corporations. The lawyers prices for IP lawsuits are astronomical. Yes you can bet the office that they please declare themselves incompetent (and I think SD did), but that doesn't often work.



No, he is sitting on the trademark hiding behind the high litigation cost, not the validity of the trademark.

In addition we can't bring congress to clarify color trademarks in the US, similar to clarifications the Europeans do have.

There is nothing non-****** about any of this. And you say yourself, when you came around the visual feel that double creme is DiMarzio was already gone. Then Larry could treat it like an actual patent and give up on it after an expiration period. You want to challenge you go to court.

:soapbox::lame:

 

[Johnny the Kid]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

Uh?
:wrf::wrf:

I'm simply looking at the vast differences in the way that Apple and Google make cell phones.

 

[treyhaislip]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

At $600/hour for a intellectual property lawyer? I want to see you convince the CEO of a SD-sized company to go for that adventure, for virtually zero increase in revenue or profits.

That's why I said,

if other pickup manufacturers thought it was worthwhile and profitable they would challenge it in court.

I still don't see how this makes DMZ this greedy villain. Had he stole the idea/color scheme from someone else then I could understand it but honestly, his pickups were distinguishable by that color and he did secure a trademark–its not right to vilify him for using his trademark.

We probably won't see eye to eye on this. I'm an accountant who works in industry and understand why we have trademark protection. I do think its silly to trademark a color one did not create but if you look at his trademark, he has a point and other manufacturers have not challenged it. With SD's large share of the market I highly doubt a judge would rule against DMZ–the trademark is not causing other manufacturers extreme loss of business/harm.

 

[Dahla]

Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

Meh. I don't care about DiMarzio or the trademark. I don't understand how cream can be trademarked, yet everyone can offer parchment. Does the "audience" know the difference from afar?

"What's that? Oh, cream. Then it's a DiMarzio".

What I want to know is, how close to cream color can you get without trouble? White is a-ok, so is parchment. What about eggshell white? Or coffee latte? Off-white?

Where does cream color start and end?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Demanic]

Re: Why is Double Cream not available on customer orders?

I still don't understand why double cream pickups are such a big deal.

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk