Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by mrilo, Feb 12, 2020.
Does Fender do this stuff too?
To my knowledge only for blatant headstock copies and using trademarked names like stratocaster and telecaster.
Do similar lawsuits about instrument shape like this occur for other instruments like pianos, violins, horns, etc? Just seems to me that there are only so many practical shapes.
It's an isomorphic one? What do the Maserati, the flat tire, and the bummer represent?
Its pretty simple. Gibson is going after competitors who are small enough that mounting a legal defense will be a serious cost. So there are two outcomes for each company they sue.
1. Company buckles and starts writing checks to Gibson. Gibson wins!
2. Company fights the legal action and beats Gibson. The legal costs have driven up their costs and/or damaged said company's finances. Gibson wins!
Unfortunately big companies shaking down little companies with bogus IP claims / threats of unavoidable legal defenses is nothing new. IBM used to be notorious for shaking down random startups for patent licensing deals, knowing there was no infringement, also knowing the small shops couldn't afford to prove it in court.
This sort of nonsense is on of the unfortunate consequences of not having a "loser pays" legal system.
The upside for the little guy is that you can probably get gibson on the hook for your legal costs (And as someone else pointed out, insurance often covers this sort of thing). The problem is that you still have to front the money (Last time I hired a lawyer for a relatively small thing, there was a 3k retainer up front). The other issue is that some small companies may settle even if they have a shot, because they are risk averse.
those keisels look more like a PRS than a gibson..
.. ruh-roh! Better watch out Paul Reed Smith, yet more wacky shenanigans from the world's worst PR department!
Gibson do realise people buy more than one guitar brand right?
Intimidation & bullying tactics do not endear yourself to a larger customer base..
I am shocked by how much the cost of Kiesel/Carvin guitars have increased recently. I recall a CS3 was like $1300 new... I'm seeing some of the California Carved guitars in the $4000 range on that site.
I wonder if Kiesel will take the same route as Tom Anderson and do a redesign. Seems silly to go to court over it, they have been knocking it out of the park with resent designs and the flexibility they offer with all the features you can upgrade is off the charts.
Yeah I was wondering the same thing too. I got an SC90S back in 2004 for just under $1100 and it was totally decked out with mahogany body and neck, flame maple top, unfinished tung oiled neck, black hardware and personalized truss rod cover. The prices have really increased.
The CS3 still starts at $1249, but as always they'll let you add thousands of dollars of upgrades if you really want them.
Ok - just built one and came out to $1500 with pretty basic options, thanks.
Metaphors, like frogs, rarely survive dissection. You either get it or you don't.
Disclaimer: That was a simile. No frogs were harmed in the making of this post.
That's probably the only time I'd support a large company buy a little company and promptly fire everyone and shut it down.
They do the same thing Gibson does.
That was 16 years ago. What has the price of other guitars done in that same time frame?
I wound up emailing them cause I was so curious. They said after that response Monster never replied and went away. Gold.
Yeah it totally depends on the options you pick. If you look through their in-stock instruments you'll see that a huge portion of them fall below the price of a Les Paul Standard and the ones that don't typically have very elaborate 7 piece exotic wood necks things that really drive up the cost.
The right way.
Henry liquidated those brands to lessen competition. He had no interest of doing what was best for them. Ask Trev Wilkinson about his lawsuit with Gibson.
As for the rest, Gibson, as you said, painted themselves into a corner while the music industry changed. But we have more choice today, & the last 15 or so years. The used market & even the new got a boost from online sales. I think guitar is flourishing. Suhr & PRS are selling & Fender is doing better. Gibson needs to just get back to basics, improve QC, & STFU.
Speak for yourself, thank you. Suhr & PRS don't have the issues Gibson is having.
In the 70s & 80s, people liked those classic shapes, but just wanted improvements F&G weren't offering. Things like Hums in Strats, hotter pups in LPs, & better fit & finishes. Then things escalated with wood types, hardware, electronics, & modified Strat & Tele shapes. Necks got wider, flatter, & with bigger fret wire. Mistakes in production guitars were being addressed by the lessons learnt by crafting. Guys were literally watching wood warp in front of their eyes & tightening fit tolerances.
Guys like Tom Anderson, Don Grosh, & John Suhr were cutting their teeth building custom stuff for pros like Mike Landau, Steve Lukather, Dan Huff, & others. People tried new designs in the 80s & 90s, but rarely did anything stick. Gibson LP players just messed with pups until the 90s & the pointy stuff got Fenderized. Trems, bolt-on's, neck shapes, & electronics. F&G were being left behind. Fender got sold & wised up, while Gibson went through an identity crisis. Then Slash came along. LPs were still used by quite a few people, but it wasn't the same.