How come guitar manufacturers can rip off Fender/Gibson ??

[Panamark]

A thought struck me today, for which I didnt have an answer.
With every bastard on earth sueing each other for copyright
infringement, etc, how come any fucking guitar manufacturer
can blatantly release a Fender or Gibson copy ??

If Eddie owned Fender, can you imagine the lawsuits ??

When in the history of guitar manufacturing, did the first
non-original manufacturer release a Fender Strat or Les Paul
copy, and it was considered legally ok ?????

Its still going on to this day, so obviously there was some
landmark decision or agreement made that allows this
practice. Do these guys pay licesning fees to Fender/Gibson ?

Does anyone know ? I mean every Korean/Chinese 2 cent
guitar builders are making strats... WTF ???

If I was Leo Fender or Les Paul, I wouldnt want my
Intellectual property being misrepresented so poorly.

Whats going on ???

[Coyote]

The funny thing is, some of the copys sound and feel BETTER than the original. (which is probaly the reason why some of the companies started suing people or telling them to stop)

[kentuckyklira]

Did you miss all the lawsuits?? It´s just that some countries have different copyright laws. You can´t just copyright a headstock form in Japan for example. Plus, copyrigths don´t last forever. As far as I know, even the Floyd Rose trem copyright ran out this year.

[MERRYKISSMASS2U]

http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/pat...-20060516.html

This is all I could find regarding the matter.

[twonabomber]

Gibson tried suing PRS over their singlecut, and lost...

[Matt White]

Usually there is some payoff involved.....

It's all aboot building the "better" mouse trap...

[Hardrock69]

The patents on Fender amp circuitry ran out in the US a few years ago...or was it Marshall?

Back in the late 70s I ran across a wine red Les Paul Custom made by Ibanez in a guitar shop.

That fucking guitar played like a dream, and sounded like God. It was one of THE best Les Paul customs I have ever played.

Unfortunately I was a broke rock musician at the time. So I could not snag it.

[sadaist]

Originally posted by Hardrock69

Unfortunately I was a broke rock musician at the time.

99.9% of musicians fit this category. Don't feel bad. Hell, 99.9% of rock fans fall into this category at one time or another. One can only hope we go through it when we are young, and not mid 30's with a cheatin' cunt ex-wife wiping you out and leaving you on skid row. Not that I'm bitter or anything.

[Panamark]

Gotta agree that some of these ripoffs are outstanding.
Ibanez in particular. If I had seen that Ibanez LP HR69
was talking about, it would probably be here now

Interesting to see that patent on the Floyd Rose too...
Eddie has patented his Drop D tuner, amongst other
things.

I still dont get it though. Look at Coca Cola.
To me their logo is as recognizable as a Fender Strat.
If some asian company manufactured a cola with the
exact same logo, WHOO BOY, would there be some shit
going down....

Yes, but Coke is trademarked you say !

Surely Strats and Les Pauls are fookin trademarked ?

I know with pharmaceauticals(Drugs) you can only patent
them for so long. But I didnt think this would apply
to musical instruments ?

Personally Im glad that there are companies like Ibanez
out there, but it makes you wonder...

The LP's and Strats are *SO* distinctive. You cant mistake them.
If thats not protectable, nothing is ?

Fucking Ed and his drug fucked masking tape trips are
apparently covered ???

[mako_kimura]

Well, if a company uses a design that's a look-alike of a fender product, they must ask permission. For example, the Jackson Phil Collen signature has a strat-like headstock, and under the pic it says copyright 2006, Fender Musical Instruments, used with permission. Also, ESP got permission from Gibson to make the Eclipse, as long as a few minor changes were made to the design

[houseofpain]

Originally posted by Coyote
The funny thing is, some of the copys sound and feel BETTER than the original. (which is probaly the reason why some of the companies started suing people or telling them to stop)

Okay, I got a friend I play with time to time who owns a Gibson Les Paul Joe Perry signature.

I have a Dillion DLP 650 TG Custom, which is a Tracii Guns signature.

Head to head running through identical amps on the gain channel, same dials, no effects, my Dillion beats his Gibson everyday. Sounds better, looks better, plays better, is flat better.

Now that doesn't mean I'm getting rid of my Jackson King V for a knock off. I'm just saying, there is a lot more to how well a guitar plays and sounds than its freaking name.

[twonabomber]

Originally posted by mako_kimura
For example, the Jackson Phil Collen signature has a strat-like headstock, and under the pic it says copyright 2006, Fender Musical Instruments, used with permission.

i wonder if they still do that now that Fender owns Jackson.

[Hardrock69]

There is a difference between a patent, a copyright, and a trademark.

There are different lengths of legally binding time periods for each....

[twonabomber]

and there's a difference with food, since they can contain "trade secrets." i thnk Coke does.

[jhale667]

Originally posted by twonabomber
i wonder if they still do that now that Fender owns Jackson.

Nope. The PC-1s now have Strat hedstocks...