Good question, and it gets to a key strategy Gibson is trying to use against Dean to overcome the patent history problem: they patented the V back in the 50s, before those design features were offered. Now they're attempting to claim, implicitly, that the '67 design features sufficiently transform the model so that it can stand as the basis for a trade dress claim... on the underlying body shape, which didn't really change from the thing they patented. So... if I had come out with a V-shaped solidbody in 1960 which had all of the '67 design features, would it be sufficiently different that Gibson wouldn't have been able to successfully sue me for patent infringement? Of course not. And that's the fatal flaw in their claim.