Gibson lawsuit: In defense of Gibson

Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by Oldschool59, Jun 21, 2019.

  1. Oldschool59

    Oldschool59 Member

    Messages:
    1,558
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Rationalizing: Let me reassure you, I will do no such thing. There is no need to. You don't get to decide what's black and what's white. I suppose current modes of discourse dictate that I should have prefaced my post with trigger warnings and color codes for safe-space passages, to avoid antagonizing the sensitive. But let's not veer political, and stay on topic, though. The OP intended no harm, but I can't prevent you from feeling hurt, nor should I have to. We're all adults, navigating these wild and savage pages of our own volition. If you're still injured and feel we should delve deeper, I urge you to do this privately. I feel this not the place to debate rhetoric and semantics. Cheers.
     
  2. FlyingVBlues

    FlyingVBlues Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    4,890
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Location:
    Virginia & Cortona Italia
    Gibson’s core guitar manufacturing business is doing fine. Its financial problems stem from the acquisition or partial ownership of companies like Baldwin Piano, Cakewalk, Dobro, Esoteric, Integra, Maestro, Steinberger, TASCAM, TEAC Corporation, Tobias, Onkyo, Stanton, KRK Systems, and Cerwin-Vega. Gibson’s ill-fated attempt at diversification is what led to them to being burdened with over $500 million in debt and being forced into Chapter 11 bankruptcy. If Henry Juszkiewicz hadn't tried to remake Gibson into a "Lifestyle" company they wouldn't be in the position they are today. One of the responsibilities of Gibson’s new management team is to return Gibson to its core strength, which is a company that just makes guitars. In contrast PRS just builds guitars and more recently amps. They just have to focus on what they're good at and continue to provide their customers with quality products.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
  3. FiestaRed

    FiestaRed Member

    Messages:
    21,076
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Location:
    Citrus Heights, CA
    Rationalizing -- you just typed a whole paragraph doing it.

    Thanks for proving my point.
     
  4. Rockledge

    Rockledge Member

    Messages:
    5,586
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Location:
    mars
    This is all fine and dandy, but the real issue here is public perception and the potential appearance that it is a company going around sticking fingers in holes in the levee rather than attacking the real problem.

    In my opinion, Gibson has not looked forward enough and has tried too hard to keep its "made in the USA" boutique image.

    I think Gibson should drop the whole image thing and start looking at the big picture.
    The big picture being a lot of musicians are playing far cheaper instruments that do the job just as well.
    Gibson should have, years ago, took a lesson from Fender with the Squiers. Only took it a step further. Epiphone really is not filling that void for them, it seems.

    My suggestion would be that they start a new brand called Chibson, have the guitars built and hardwared in China, and have them shipped here to have electronics slapped in them.
    I suspect they haven't done so because they are afraid to compete with themselves by offering a less expensive line of guitars in fear of losing their image, and I think they are completely overlooking the fact that thousands of guitarists who cannot afford a boutique guitar are already buying overseas guitars, and if they really wanted the coveted Gibson name on a guitar and could afford it, they would spend the money to get that name on the headstock.

    My point being that if they did offer a cheaper line of guitars and had them mostly constructed overseas, it would not cut into their boutique market of the coveted Gibson guitar in the least, not any more than the overseas market and other domestic makers such as PRS have done.

    Fender is still selling guitars, and still afloat even though Squier sells tons of guitars.

    So imagine this. Gibson, taking advantage of the public perception instead of rejecting it, and even being a bit facetious, creates a side brand called Chibson, again, taking advantage of a name already on the streets. That alone would give them points with the public, just out of the fact they would appear to be getting less ostentatious and becoming more in tune with the public.
    Have that line of guitars built in China, to exact specs, which lets face it, the Chinese are great at making superior guitars, without electronics in them, and perhaps without hardware. Have either the electronics or the electronics and hardware added here on an assembly line, and have them strung with a name brand string and set up here. That way they can be advertised as being superior to guitars completed in China. They could sell them for a bit more than brands such as Agile because of being finished and passing inspection here.

    Or , rather than Chibson, just keep the Gibson script logo for them and have a Chinese character below the name on the headstock rather than their current design, a character that somehow represents quality or desirablility.


    At the same time keep making u.s.a. Gibsons, which there will always be a market for if they knock of the BS and get back to making high priced guitars that try to live up to the price and feed the elite market.
    I seriously doubt doing this would cut into their Gibson elite image or sales any more than other bands already are.
    And it would give them a hedge against the future of guitar.

    Because lets be realistic, Gibson needs to appeal to younger buyers, and younger buyers are not looking to buy a guitar because Tony Iommi or Jimmy Page or Justin Hayward played it, the coming generations are going to be fans of other music. They risk losing that market and will lose the rock era market because of attrition.
    Us old rock guys are dying off. My son isn't interested in what Jimmy Page or Eric Clapton played, he owns guitars like ESPs and Ibanezs. And he don't give a damn where they are made, as long as they do the job.

    Again, there is no reason Gibson could not be having both markets.
    Fender did it, and it seems to have been a whopping success for them, and nobody I know of hates Fender because of Squiers.

    Whether any of us like it or not, we live in a world economy, we are no longer isolated from the rest of the planet.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
    xmd5a likes this.
  5. Oldschool59

    Oldschool59 Member

    Messages:
    1,558
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    I would have, had I justified the use of ''Guitar Justice Warriors'', the offending term. Instead, I just told you that no justification is needed, and offered to take if offline. In short, I did not rationalize. You can be intellectually dishonest and treat any piece of text as a ''rationalizing'', or you can be a good sport. It looks to me you're just itching for a good old forum thrashing, of which I will have none. Cheers.
     
    scribbler, Jabberwocky and ArtDecade like this.
  6. ArtDecade

    ArtDecade Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,931
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Location:
    Twangsylvania
    That... offended you? Chin up, kiddo.
     
    scribbler, Bodeanicus and Oldschool59 like this.
  7. Help!I'maRock!

    Help!I'maRock! Member

    Messages:
    10,180
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Location:
    Capital City
    Gibson is indefensible. They’re going to lose because they didn’t protect their trademarks for decades. Case closed.

    I bought a PRS over a Gibson, and a Reverend over a Gibson, because they were superior instruments at the same prices.

    Brand loyalty is for idiots.
     
    OldHootOwl and W88 like this.
  8. uab9253

    uab9253 Member

    Messages:
    1,967
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2017
    Location:
    Mid Atlantic
    It's been brought up before in this thread, but doesn't seem to have been listened to, so I'll bring it up a second time.

    Yes, normally someone with a title as elevated as Mark's should and would have a say. He's so new to the job and to that profession, that I'm betting that he did not have a say.
    Yes, someone in that position can and perhaps should quit if they are that opposed to a major corporate directive. And for sake of argument, I'll presume that Mark was opposed.

    Mark has been in a position of this type, of this stature and of this pay rate only once in his life. And that means maybe two months time on the job. He's an actual human being that is maybe 40 years old, tops - more likely in his 30s with a young family who he moved across the country to grab a chance of a lifetime. What's he really going to do? Say screw this - I'm hitting LinkdIn hard and I'm going to a similar position at Guild!!!

    He doesn't have that much industry juice yet. I'm sure he was likely not at the table when this decision was made. So give the guy a break. He's a decent human being just trying to make a living in this world, the same way all of us are.
     
    bossaddict, scribbler and Devnor like this.
  9. BearBryan

    BearBryan Member

    Messages:
    1,029
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2018
    Gibson in it's current form is a joke.

    Disclaimer: All opinions are my own and are not guaranteed to reflect reality. This current opinion does not value how much you love your les paul/SG/etc... that was made when the company wasn't run by morons.

    :hide
     
  10. Oldschool59

    Oldschool59 Member

    Messages:
    1,558
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    I love your disclaimer. Wish more of us would have that level of detachment. Things would go down easier. ;-)
     
  11. Whittlez

    Whittlez Member

    Messages:
    2,156
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2015
    Location:
    Seattlr
    Gibson KEEPS losing when they file suit. Over and Over. The only one they won (that I am aware of last time I checked the caselaw which was admittedly a couple of years ago) was the one against PRS -which was overturned on appeal.

    They write cease and desist letters (essentially a legal form of bullying) that gets small co's to stop doing what they are doing, but at least last time I checked - they do not OWN a trademark on the LP shape ... or the open book headstock.

    I predict they will lose... again.

    But I'll wait to see.
     
    W88 and JLee like this.
  12. FiestaRed

    FiestaRed Member

    Messages:
    21,076
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Location:
    Citrus Heights, CA
    Offended -- no.

    Just pointing out what is already there.

    I love my Gibsons.
     
  13. mikendzel

    mikendzel Member

    Messages:
    833
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Location:
    Easton, MD
    Like most things on internet forums, their are people with an infinite amount of perspectives. A (very) few have the ability to objectively weigh the facts from both sides of an argument. Most of the others feel as though they're qualified to not only formulate opinions, but force those opinions down others throats, call for boycotts/firings/marches/etc., and argue endlessly with others without ever actually taking the entirety of the issue into account.

    A call to arms is usually the first tip off that someone is a blind fanatic. Don't interact with anyone who looks for mob "justice."
     
    Jabberwocky likes this.
  14. Papanate

    Papanate Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    19,792
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2013
    Location:
    North Carolina

    I didn't think of that - but it sure sounds logical - the new owners felt that their Brand was not being serviced - and since have taken steps.
     
  15. Oldschool59

    Oldschool59 Member

    Messages:
    1,558
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    It's difficult to assess the situation, and to project intentions on the managers without having all the info. Yours is a very valid point in this direction.
     
    Jabberwocky likes this.
  16. ArtDecade

    ArtDecade Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,931
    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Location:
    Twangsylvania
    Gibson has a tendency to sue (or threaten to sue) for this or that every few years. This isn't new and is probably something they do to make sure that are defending their copyright over the current 60 year period.
     
  17. wetordry

    wetordry Member

    Messages:
    4,162
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Location:
    virginia mountains
    If they lose, I suppose they'll have to shat or get off that pot.
    Stalling the courts might buy them some time to get ready.
     
  18. Ranch Dubois

    Ranch Dubois Member

    Messages:
    57
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2017
    I was getting so heated at work about this whole thing last night. It steams my beans thst Gibs would try this stuff when they barely have the capacity to keep their own doors open. Oooooh I'm gonna sell my SG. I'm gon do it. I wrote a song for them!

    "Psycho in my mind
    Lunatic hysteria
    Wake up in the morning
    And I got diphtheria"
    - from the Chronicles of Gibson
     
  19. hunter

    hunter Supporting Member

    Messages:
    5,203
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2002
    https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=...TION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch

    One other interesting piece of info this link reveals is on the Documents tab. A history of filings is provided. Take a look at the NOS (Notice of Suit) Incoming history. No suit filings from 1997 to 2010, a rash of suits from Dec 2010 through Aug 2011, a couple through 2016 and then another batch of suits starting in June of 2016 through 2018. Now it looks like that will continue in 2019.

    I wonder if there is any correlation with financials? I think all the initial big borrowing was in the 2011-2012 time frame. And we all know what the 2016 forward finances are. Probably nothing but the numbers are making me wonder if something in the culture and conditions at Gibson drives these moves.

    hunter
     
  20. PaulHudgins

    PaulHudgins Member

    Messages:
    335
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2014
    Location:
    Mckinney, TX
    Which is probably why they are suing Dean instead of Schecter or ESP who also have copied the same designs. It's also why they are not going after the boutique builders first. Find a small but relevant company that copied some of their designs, take them to court and win the lawsuit to establish precedent in court before hammering every other company. It's a sleazy move on their part.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice