Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by presence, Jun 13, 2019.
Yes, they certainly do, but when they do, they can come across as bullies.
Exactly. Yes, protect your IP. How you go about doing that is going to have an effect on your brand. Most corps have legal teams that simply take action on their behalf. They don't issue aggressive videos to their customer base. They realize that they have to protect the integrity of their brand as well. Gibson have just took the wrong route with this video and it makes them look like immature out of touch bullies. They could grow up and protect their IP in much more professional, effective ways.
Here we go. I suspect there will be many more frank responses to come.
What's most interesting to me is that while Mark was at Norm's, he had NO problem showcasing copies and talked about why people were making them. And now he's part of Gibson, and puts this video out. I get it, he works for the company now, and this is the message. Just makes him pretty hypocritical IMHO, but hey...Gibson is paying his bills, so once again, the almighty dollar changes people's tunes quickly.
This is just about as horrible a video as when Norm's made the horrible "Patreon only" video content.
I'm reading through the comments on the original youtube video, very interesting.
I don't blame Mark personally. Gibson employs him now. You can tell he's uncomfortable in this video, but it's his job to read the script and get the message out there. I work in a corporate environment too, and this just wreaks of pressure and intimidation. Mark and others are obviously getting a burning platform handed to them from above to go and sick the dogs on anyone cutting into what they see as their potential profits. I feel sorry for Mark. I know what it feels to be a foot soldier for out of touch leaders... It's soul crushing.
Kind of like becoming a made man where you have to prove how bad you are by fitting someone with a pair of cement shoes so they can sleep with the fishes.
I take it the tape on the headstock comment was in reference to the Motley Crue biopic?
That video is ridiculous, a step in the wrong direction for the "new" Gibson...
...sez the guy playing a Navigator. Not cheap, but certainly putting his money where his mouth is!
I agree 100% that message should go directly to their competitors, not out in the public arena where it isn't going to accomplish their infringement issues.
Gibson has had a difficult time with their reputation, and Henry in particular being a dick. The time for rebranding and taking the company in a different direction is now, and this video does not help that.
Repeating it again Gibson has every right to defend their brand and trademarks. They bought it - they own it. They are part of the "we". I don't feel this wreaks of pressure and intimidation but they have every right to assert their claims. If one of the preferred brands of TGP had their designs copied, this forum would be up in arms. Gibson IP deserves the same respect. Personally I don't care about this video it all comes down to the guitars - can they build the best and can I afford them?
They do have the right to defend their brand. First step, make a good video. This one sucks.
I recognize this guy from Norman's Rare Guitars, guess he went over to Gibson. The Gibson bravado absolutely screams insecurity (and always has). If they spent as much time on quality control for their guitars as they do hyping up their name, hashtagging "only a Gibson is good enough" on Instagram, and otherwise behaving like a bunch of 15 year olds at a sleepover they wouldn't need to pump themselves up so much because the quality would speak for itself as it does with any number of their competitors. You don't see any other company putting down competitors publicly and that alone speaks volumes.
I know they make some great guitars, I've played more than my fair share of impressive Gibsons so I'm not looking to get into a flame war about the company, but I think most people can agree that an attitude/behavior like this is beneath a company of their stature and history, and is more than a little shameful.
I love my light Les Pauls, but this video and the "Only a Gibson is Good Enough" slogan seem like weird re-education camp material where the guards are walking around in Ramones leather jackets drinking whiskey. I'll stick to my tan pants and daddy-daughter dates.
Gibson's quality and price should say all that needs to be said.
Weird video from Gibson, weird hostility from TGP.
Gibson is clearly aiming at Chibsons, not a luthier making three a year.
Chibson, good enough if you're broke and have some setup skills!! Joking aside, most of the Chibson market would dry up if Gibson would just put the correct headstock shape on the Epiphone's...many, many folks are hung up on that one issue.
I just ignore the messaging and let the guitars speak for themselves. I like all kinds of guitars. If Corporate Gibson decides to release stupid videos, don't care what happens to them while I'm on the stage with one of their guitars kicking out the jams. I just want a guitar I like, ignore the BS. I don't care if the world hates Gibson so long as they aren't interfering negatively with my life - which they aren't. Gibson isn't the only "dooshy" company out there that has tons of customers. It's corporate stuff, and you need a corporation these days if you want tons of people to get your stuff nationwide - or even international. Not trying to ruffle feathers here, but I don't understand the contempt for this company and yet GC has avid defenders... I interact directly with GC and have received crap service, etc. Even now, don't care about GC and that stuff. I just don't go there and haven't for a long time. Simple solution to simple problem. I digress. Back to dissing Gibson and their Agnesi video
Cringey in the extreme. Clearly reading the script from a teleprompter or cue-cards. Half of the video shot from a side angle with him looking, not at the viewer, but at cue-card guy. Strange defensiveness in his tone of voice. Opening statement includes reference to "shaping sounds... across genders." Seriously?
Split diamond headstock and pineapple inlays are "innovations"? Seriously?
Every guitar that looks kind of like a Gibson is a counterfeit "by definition"? Uh, no. A counterfeit "by definition" is a guitar that is manufactured to look exactly like a certain model -- as close as possible including the original manufacturer's logo so as to fool the buyer into thinking it's the real thing. Only a relatively small selection of "Gibson-like" guitars are in this category.
So much wrong with the way this was presented.
I don’t have a problem with Gibson attempting to protect their intellectual property. Having a patent, a trademark or a copyright is meaningless unless the owner protects it. And in the case of trademarks, if a company doesn’t actively protect it against a possible infringement they could legally lose their ownership of it. Companies like Kleenex and Xerox have conducted aggressive marketing campaigns for many years aimed at reminding the public that they are a brand, and not a generic product to avoid such a fate. For example, Xerox’s marketing frequently states that people “use a Xerox copy machine”, they don't ”make a Xerox”. Gibson is basically doing the same thing to prevent their trademarks from being genericized. And they are warning companies that infringe upon their patents, trademarks and copyrights that Gibson will take legal action against them. .
In 2009 Fender lost its case before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent And Trademark Office to trademark the Stratocaster, Telecaster and Precision body shapes. In its decision the Appeal Board stated that “the applicant (Fender) has not established acquired distinctiveness such that these two-dimensional outlines of guitar bodies, standing alone, serve to indicate source. The evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that these configurations are so common in the industry that they cannot identify source…. In fact, in the case of the Stratocaster body outline, this configuration is so common that it is depicted as a generic electric guitar in a dictionary”.
While this decision was very beneficial to the plaintiffs (Stuart Spector Designs, Ltd.; U.S. Music Corporation; Warmoth Guitar Products, Inc.; Indoor Storm, Ltd.; Tradition Guitars, Inc.; Raise Praise, Inc. d/b/a Tom Anderson Guitar Works; Schecter Guitar Research, Inc.; JS Technologies, Inc. (Suhr); D Music Products; Inc., Sadowsky Guitars Ltd.; The ESP Guitar Company; Lakland Musical Instruments, LLC; Michael Tobias; Richard Keldsen; Levinson Music Products, Ltd.; James Triggs; and the Peavey Electronic Corporation) it is probably a cautionary tale for companies like Gibson that failing to protect their intellectual property does have serious consequences.