Chistopher
malapterurus electricus tonewood instigator
I don't know, Jericho's looming pretty hard to defend right now.
WTH Gibson?
- Thread starter Chris Pile
- Start date
- Status
I don't know, Jericho's looming pretty hard to defend right now.
Aceman
I am your doctor of love!
The problem here is that we have had laws on this issue. Gibson let go of the IP. There is now no legal basis to support them.
Every claim Gibson makes on the shapes; LP, V, Explorer, 335 should be immediately dismissed upon submission. But as Dave said - not what it is about. Same reason any "I won't sue clause" is meaningless. There is ALWAYS a Lawyer who will challenge that.
Don't like the law, change it for the future, or pay attention to your IP.
Me - I think I need to go buy a Chibson and work it up just to middle finger Gibson.
Last edited:
NegativeEase
New member
Sort of a Ship of Theseus argument, but is Jericho Guitars really making a "Jericho Guitar" if you make identical established shapes, geometries, with hardware and electronics available to everyone else?
Im sure they are high quality guitars, but there's nothing on their site that isnt someone else's style -just made blacker with some bridge and tuner variations.
What constitutes the identity of a guitar? in the case of a car -primarily the shape -as the color is selectable and motors and parts are shared with other models and even makes.
So perhaps Gibson by not defending their shapes legally for 70 years, didn't recognize what the real identity of their brand was.
Im sure they are high quality guitars, but there's nothing on their site that isnt someone else's style -just made blacker with some bridge and tuner variations.
What constitutes the identity of a guitar? in the case of a car -primarily the shape -as the color is selectable and motors and parts are shared with other models and even makes.
So perhaps Gibson by not defending their shapes legally for 70 years, didn't recognize what the real identity of their brand was.
GuitarStv
Sock Market Trader
Oh man, this guy's days were number for sure
Close to exact copies.. with some gold bling.
I don't really like Gibson at all, and usually think their lawsuits are pretty bullshit. But . . . that's an exact copy of a Gibson guitar. I get where they're coming from on this. Like, if the headstock was changed or something . . .
Last edited:
GuitarStv
Sock Market Trader
Are you implying that Jolly's ass is not worth buying?
In this case, Gibson has a point. But I think they are gonna pick off companies one by one.
JOLLY
Super Simonologist
:haha:
treyhaislip
Well-known member
If its a direct copy of a Gibson then only the direct copies should be removed...not shutting down their entire catalog, website, emails, etc.
Also, I think it is B.S. that Gibson can undergo bankruptcy and THEN start suing companies that are not as Mark Agnesi says "authentic". Like all of those "authentic" couldn't save you from going bankrupt.
The last several Gibson's I tried were decent but no where near the price tag. The acoustics finishes looked sloppy and the LPs needed the frets worked over. Gibson should focus on making GIbson USA stand apart from Epiphone in terms of quality rather than suing companies that make a better guitar than they do.
Also, I think it is B.S. that Gibson can undergo bankruptcy and THEN start suing companies that are not as Mark Agnesi says "authentic". Like all of those "authentic" couldn't save you from going bankrupt.
The last several Gibson's I tried were decent but no where near the price tag. The acoustics finishes looked sloppy and the LPs needed the frets worked over. Gibson should focus on making GIbson USA stand apart from Epiphone in terms of quality rather than suing companies that make a better guitar than they do.
Chris Pile
Well-known member
JC Curleigh has gotten too big for his Levi's.
chadd
Well-known member
This is it exactly. There is also zero chance that Gibson didn't reach out to him prior to contacting the web host. It's kinda odd to see people complaining that Gibson does this too often, then say that they shouldn't retain their IP because they didn't do it enough.
NegativeEase
New member
Yeah, thats what I was driving at with my first comment, I think there is hyperbole in Jericho's recounting of events, they are painting a story to promote themselves, but the idea that a cease and desist didn't come to him first -is a bit of a stretch to believe
GuitarStv
Sock Market Trader
Sometimes they're a little hard to understand.
Ain't nobody mistaking this Dean for a Gibson . . . except Gibson's lawyers:
NegativeEase
New member
This is the only credit I'll give Dean in ripping off the V shape
-taking the original idea of the V shape as the only shape designed to be it's own guitar stand when leaning against the wall.
Dean made a V that you can also turn completely upside down and lean against the wall
Thats true innovation.
Securb
One of Jerry's Kids
The Dean headstock design was introduced by Master Luthier Holden Afartt
NegativeEase
New member
Hah, in fareness, Im scarred by the terrible import pawn store Deans of the 90s, Im sure they are way better now
But that headstock -I just cannot do.
Chistopher
malapterurus electricus tonewood instigator
I will the one guitar I think Gibson has the most sway in terms of their copyright argument is the V. Any V bodied guitar with any hardware looks like a Gibson V.
Except for the headstock Dean did greatly improve upon the design, but unless they changed the body shape even slightly, yeah put that on the TV and that will be heavily mistaken for a Gibson.
Except for the headstock Dean did greatly improve upon the design, but unless they changed the body shape even slightly, yeah put that on the TV and that will be heavily mistaken for a Gibson.
NegativeEase
New member
Yeah, but Gibson neglected to defend the design for 60 years -which is stipulated when you get a trademark, patent etc etc.
So they sort of gave up the right to own it.
GuitarStv
Sock Market Trader
- different headstock
- thru body strung
- different neck joint
- different cutaway where the neck meets the body
- different input jack location
- three knobs, not two
- different strap location
- no pickguard
- different selector switch location
- binding
. . . but you're probably right.
- Status
Similar threads
