Gibson sends cease and desist to Kiesel

Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by mrilo, Feb 12, 2020.

  1. Gibson Dog

    Gibson Dog Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,242
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2018
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    I'm sure you guys saw this but if not Sully posted it today. I'm trying to stay out of this it's pretty messy! I think Gibson doesn't care & the reality is probably at least 90% of people know nothing about this they just want a guitar & they know their heroes played guitars that said Gibson on them.

    This is full on BS, a corporation picking on companies that can't afford to defend themselves, sounds familiar to me. Sully is a good dude & this is big time BS!!

     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2020
  2. therhodeo

    therhodeo Member

    Messages:
    9,574
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Location:
    Owasso, OK
    Is that for their V model? It looks like a Jackson King V.
     
  3. Gibson Dog

    Gibson Dog Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,242
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2018
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    UOTE="therhodeo, post: 30012396, member: 15642"]Is that for their V model? It looks like a Jackson King V.[/QUOTE]
    I have no idea I sent him a message so when he gets back to me I'll let you know. We have a mutual friend who told me he's scared & WAY beyond angry. He made a conscious effort to do something semi original & NONE of his guitars look anything like any Gibson that I've ever seen. Yeah his V is small & not really even a V so that would be laughable if it's that.

    I have no idea what they're thinking other than let's just send these to everyone most of the builders won't be able to defend themselves. It's pathetic & embarrassing at this point. The problem is like I said at least 90% of people have no idea anything is going on so if they want a guitar they'll buy a LP, Tele or Strat. I didn't care before I just assumed they would get it together but jesus they're doing everything wrong so no clue what the hell they're thinking.
     
    uab9253 and Average Joe like this.
  4. Anacharsis

    Anacharsis Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,858
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    "Nice little guitar company you got here. Would be a shame if something were to, umm, happen to it."

    It's as though the private equity firm took over and thought to themselves "Henry's problem was that he thought too much about the guitars Gibson was making, and not enough about how to shut down other makers." Oh, and that he didn't make it enough about him, instead of about the people in the company who have even the vaguest idea how to build guitars. So they hire new execs to do C&D and photo shoots.
     
  5. Gibson Dog

    Gibson Dog Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,242
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2018
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    It would lose way more than any PRS - at least most people have heard of PRS. This thing would be like those echopark ghetto things that guys paid $8k-$12k for & they can't even get $4k for them.

    I'm not that smart but I did go to business school, you're selling a $10,000 new guitar & you say "you have to buy a case with this guitar - $70 or $100" makes me want to smash my head against the wall!! Did they think they needed to fill every pixel of space on the already crowded page? Was it 'bring your kid to work day' & it was a 10yo's idea? That's actually common sense but if you have no common sense they do teach you that stuff in college.

    Do guitar companies only hire the bottom 10% in their class? Gibson is literally doing almost every single thing wrong. It's confusing to me how people like this are running a company, these guys/girls are totally clueless.
     
  6. strings2wood

    strings2wood Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,177
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2006
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
  7. Phineas Ball

    Phineas Ball Fuzz Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    2,494
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2014
    Location:
    Equatorial Los Angeles
    Why is protection of one's IP such an evil?

    If you invented/made/built/developed something iconic, and thousands of imitators copied it, would you happily allow your idea - and your profits - to be diluted?

    The fact (and that might be the wrong word) that guitar players like only three body shapes isn't Gibson's fault. They designed one of them. Why shouldn't they be celebrated by both players and the paying public for doing so?

    I'm open to an argument that a trademark should legally be more like a copyright or a patent - i.e. it expires after some length of time... but until it is, it isn't. Gibson simply isn't the bad guy for seeking to defend its brand. If Chevy put a Ford logo on its grille - if Ford put a Ferrari emblem on its grille - wouldn't Ford/Ferrari be entitled to say "No!"?
     
    hippieboy likes this.
  8. jm9239

    jm9239 Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    F*ck Gibson. One blunder that pisses me off after another. God. I will NEVER buy any of their products. They need to stop this BS, focus on building higher quality instruments and be humble and apologetic. Enough of the litigation, enough of the arrogance, enough of play authentic fear mongering, enough running over guitars, enough putting out sub-par quality for a premium price.

    In other news I LOVE my Collings and PRS guitars. Consistently stellar quality and companies you can feel good about.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2020
  9. guitargeek6298

    guitargeek6298 Member

    Messages:
    2,723
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Location:
    The wilds of MA
    Did Kiesel put a Gibson logo on their instruments?

    I don't begrudge Gibson protecting their trademarks. But that doesn't seem to be what's happening here. As has been mentioned many times in the thread, nobody is buying a Kiesel thinking they are getting a Gibson. And the two models in question look quite a bit less like the Gibson models than other guitars in the marketplace. That's why it's confusing to some people why Gibson would pursue it.

    As I mentioned early on, Keisel's V guitar isn't even symmetrical like Gibson's. The single cut model looks more similar, but not any more than PRS' single cut, and Gibson lost that court case.
     
  10. jm9239

    jm9239 Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    It’s just Gibson’s usual intimidation BS hoping they’ll stop when faced with having to spend money on legal fees. I hope Kiesel just tells Gibson to pound sand and keeps making them.
     
  11. guitargeek6298

    guitargeek6298 Member

    Messages:
    2,723
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Location:
    The wilds of MA
    Well, I just got an email from Kiesel, and they're still offering the CS-6 and Ultra V models at a discount, so it would seem that's their attitude.
     
  12. jm9239

    jm9239 Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    I hope it is. And I hope the discount isn’t just because they want to move through existing inventory (and/or parts) before they stop building them.
     
    superstratjunky likes this.
  13. Sirloin

    Sirloin Supporting Member

    Messages:
    14,726
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    NC
    I was being a bit sarcastic. If someone bought that 7 string Kiesel for $10k, they might be able to sell it for $2k - and that’s a stretch.

    PRS PS guitars do tend to take a huge hit though.

    the thing about Kiesel is, no one is forcing you to buy that guitar. Unlike Gibson and their crazy dealer arrangements where the dealer is forced to buy a variety of guitars. Some of which no one wants and sit in their inventory forever.
     
  14. brbadg

    brbadg Member

    Messages:
    178
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Location:
    Timonium,Maryland
    What do you mean? V shaped.Case closed.They have every right to do it.
    You have the means to create and produce a guitar.Stop copying other company's ****.
     
    hippieboy likes this.
  15. guitargeek6298

    guitargeek6298 Member

    Messages:
    2,723
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Location:
    The wilds of MA
    Thank you for your nuanced addition to this discussion.
     
    Davy, jm9239, lp_bruce and 4 others like this.
  16. LeftyGuitarist

    LeftyGuitarist Member

    Messages:
    604
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Gibson is the IBM of the guitar world. They've been living on past reputation for a very long time.
     
  17. Sirloin

    Sirloin Supporting Member

    Messages:
    14,726
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    NC
    The featured guitar on their CS6 page...


    Is this actual guitar...
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2020
    hippieboy and superstratjunky like this.
  18. Gibson Dog

    Gibson Dog Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,242
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2018
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    That's what I thought but regardless you're 99.9% right on all counts.

    Any of those extreme ornate guitars are going to depreciate like throwing a brick into a swimming pool! Someone made a car analogy a week or so ago & it was spot on. You put whatever you want into a car or build/buy a guitar like that thing but when or if you want to sell if you have to find the 1/10% person that wants exactly what you have, almost no chance.

    A PRS PS will definitely take a big hit but not as bad as that Kiesel. I don't think you could sell that thing for almost any price, but if you're ready & willing to take a big hit you could definitely sell a PRS PS.

    Gibson is run by people that have absolutely no idea what they're doing, period! I'm not a cocky guy at all but I'm confident in my business abilities & I think I could turn the entire company around in under two years. I would immediately cut the models way down, hire back old employees & hire some of the great current builders. I would get everyone crystal clearly on the same page. I would concentrate on getting our house & products in order first. The products have to be high quality, consistent & priced competitively. ZERO sub par guitars leave the factory, period. There's a lot more to it than that but I don't want to give them a blueprint for turning it around (not that they have people in place that are capable of it.) Then once you have a solid foundation there's a correct way of bringing back some models etc & growing the company from there. I would tell everyone to keep their f'n mouths shut & concentrate on a singular plan that would be laid out in extreme detail. Who gives a sh*t what these small companies are doing within reason, one thing they can't copy is your guitars will say Gibson on the headstock. Just my opinion I don't think I am but I could be completely wrong. Time to head to Dreamville..
     
    uab9253 and superstratjunky like this.
  19. LeftyGuitarist

    LeftyGuitarist Member

    Messages:
    604
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    That looks more like a Dean Evo than a Les Paul.
     
  20. G'OlPeachPhan

    G'OlPeachPhan Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,180
    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Location:
    USA
    Totally irrelevant example; no one here is using Gibson’s name or emblem, or any likeness of it... unique branding versus claiming ownership of basic geometry are separate things. Is a round wheel and a rubber tire iconic, or essential?

    Gibson is grossly stretching the truth of what intellectual property is, and what is justifiable in protecting it, to the detriment us all. To your example, the problem with it is that Gibson, if they were an auto manufacturer, is essentially saying that, ‘if you build a car that has a steering wheel, four wheels, and seats, we’re going to run you off of the road we’re trying to own.’

    Gibson is not protecting their intellectual property, they’re protecting their market share, and all but trying to own the very right to own the road itself, and at the least trying make it so they’re the only ones who are allowed to build things to drive on it.

    Gibson is copying/stealing others’ ideas to a far greater extent simply by building electric guitars in the first place... Gibson didn’t invent the guitar, but they have purchased the legal rights to push around anyone else who wants to participate. If Gibson were building something that is actually unique and worthy of standing on it’s own merits and competing, the Gibson brand and name would itself stand for that very quality and reputation, and they wouldn’t need to conduct themselves by bullying any competition that comes along, nor need to spend so much money on marketing, endorsements, etc., all allowing them to continue to sell inferior guitars at an inflated price for one reason alone: PROFIT. So as it stands now, the name Gibson stands for a bunch of stuff that has very little to do with guitars.

    We’re essentially putting the whole world up for sale to the highest bidder with the deepest pockets, which doesn’t bode well for us guitar players. Will we allow a big company to claim ownership of all basic geometry next?
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2020
    cutaway, Viking999, therhodeo and 3 others like this.

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