Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
Forum Ringside => Guitars, Amps and Effects => Topic started by: hunter on March 26, 2009, 06:23:03 PM
-
Long live common sense!
Check it out: http://www.hugeracksinc.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=55940
-
Anyone got Cliffnotes on the whole shebang?
-
awesome! :D
i think i remember hearing about this on the gear page ages ago. i think fender tried to trademark the strat and tele body shapes, or something ridiculous like that.
-
Good!
Anyone that gets a suhr because they mistook it for a fender doesnt deserve a suhr anyway!
-
That's cool. Suhr inspires huge GAS in me the way PRS and Anderson just fail to. I keep finding myself trying to justify £3K on a guitar, which is something I'd never done before I saw the Suhr Modern.
-
Now this gives a lot of latitude for small makers
Fender will go after headstock/ logo infringements all the more now I suspect
-
Now this gives a lot of latitude for small makers
Fender will go after headstock/ logo infringements all the more now I suspect
Imagine a multi national like Fender sues you, guess that can cause quite some sleepless nights if their lawyers make your life difficult, even if you're not a super-small luthier.
-
I think its a wrong decision myself - Leo Fender and team actually designed those guitar shapes - they were shapes that no one else had even thought of before (unlike Gibson, who just cut away the spanish guitar shape) - the Fender team put years of design into those shapes and unimaginative bandwagon jumpers like Suhr and others just came along and copied it cynically to make money out of someone else's design genius and then charged a premium for making guitars someone else sweated over and risked their entire livelihood over. That seems like theft to me, even if Fender are now a multinational (they were'nt in 1959 or 1983!).
If you think it is rock and roll to pay what Suhr charge for a Fender Strat copy then you have too much money!
-
Looking at the document summarising the actual proceedings, the argument seems to be that the Strat, Tele and Precision body shapes have become generic because people have been copying them for so many years and no-one's particularly made a fuss about it:
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91162497&pty=OPP&eno=13 (http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno=91162497&pty=OPP&eno=13)
That seems fair enough, many manufacturers have based their designs on the Fender originals and it seems unfair to suddenly clamp down on those who happen to still be doing it now.
But I don't like the tone of the comments on that forum going "the shapes are generic, bollocks to Fender, I'd love to see their faces, etc...". Generic maybe, but someone did actually design them in the first place... and that "someone" was Fender. John Suhr, in particular, has based his entire career on making nothing more than upmarket Fender copies, so maybe he could show them just a little respect.
Fender's main problem is that they're trying to shut the stable door.... about 40 years after the horse has bolted, died of natural causes and been sent to the glue factory. :|
-
I think it just makes their whole argument pretty empty when SOOOO many manufacturers just make/made Fender clones without fuss.
Even if you're purely talking about high end boutique-y kinda things, what about the likes of Sadowsky? They probably shift as many instruments as Suhr do.
If they'd ALWAYS fought their corner regarding copyright, then fair play, but they haven't, at all, not even a wee bit.
-
This was the gist of the Gibson/PRS outcome as well. If they were serious about it they'd have protected them more rigourously. If you don't have the relevant protective measures in place then it's no-one's fault but your own if somebody copies it.
Also, I think it's somewhat unfair to attack the boutique builders as unashamed plagiarists. They were responding to a gap in the market, largely brought about by complacency by the big two. Really guys like Suhr and Anderson did Fender a favour, showing that people would pay $4K for a strat if it was well made enough. They created the market that the Fender Custom Shop now sells to. Also, Leo Fender (or his estate now) hasn't made money off those designs for 40 years.
At the end of the day the winners here are us, as competition serves the consumer. Last year the Les Paul standard saw the biggest improvements in years, almost certainly in response to PRS. Would we have seen that if Gibson had one their case? Possibly not.
-
Good points Ben
Gibson were ambitious - seems that they wanted rights to all single cutaway instruments
And if Fender wanted rights to all double cutaway ones, it means that there would only be 2 guitar companies FEnder and Gibson
Because of the legacy of players playing those classic designs , most players want something similar /in that vein
It would have bordered on creating a monopoly, which is stunning considering both Fender were all but down and out in the mid 80s
-
Fender accepted copies in the past. It made their designs more visable and made people want to have those models and evetually get a real Fender.
The gentlemen's agreement was that the headstock wasn't to be copied.
It's a little too late now.
-
Fender and Gibson both had their chance to make sure no one copied their shapes back when the Japanese copies starting coming out, but they only went for logo/headstock. They did not care one bit for the body shape.
This to me from the start sounded like the Fender company were crying like a baby that someone could do what they could do, but far far better and was throwing its dolly out of its pram.
I don't care for either company, i do care for Leo Fender himself and i thank him for designing the Strat. I should probably thank Les Paul for his design too, as in some twisted manner my PRS may not have existed if it weren't for his... design.
All Fender do now is recreate Leo's designs and incorporate other peoples ideas and modifications, never coming up with anything new themselves and always being really slow on the uptake, too afraid to do anything really new unless its on someone's 'signature' guitar.
I'm for one very glad i have alternatives to the two big box shifters.
-
Interesting story.
Way, way back when Fender trademarked the headstocks, in one of the meetings with the lawyers, it was discussed on whether they should trademark the Tele and Strat body shapes as well. Leo decided it wasn't worth it for the $3000-$4000 more it would cost.
Believe me, all the old timers (now) who were present at that meeting kick themselves daily over that decision. I just talked with one of them yesterday about this case as a matter of fact.
-
Well the irony there is that if Fender had of won G&L would not be able to continue with their guitars based on Strat's and Tele's, I wonder how Leo Fender would have felt about that?
-
Oh, I agree with the decision. It's too late to go back 40+ years. The conversation went along the lines of, could you imagine a world with absolutely no Tele or Strat body copies, I mean none?
The way it is, is a good thing. Ibanez, et al guitar companies have provided variations on a theme that Fender never would have built. Perhaps the universal employment of the guitar as THE rock and blues instrument, even the wide ranging influence of these styles of music would have been limited if the exploration and creativity of the artisans designing and building guitars were prevented from rooting their ideas on the foundation that is Fender. We all stand on the shoulders of another, greatness is achieved many times from building on a pioneer's groundbreaking work.
-
Yeah the Fender company were dumb for not trademarking the shape of the strat and tele - but in the 50s there was no one like Suhr or Tom Anderson to compete with you. It also shows how Leo Fender, the Henry Ford of the electric guitar world, was a notorious skin flint when it came to paying money for things like patents (or wood or machinery or office cups for that matter) - in fact its a wonder his instruments were'nt made out of chip board given his view of production economics.
-
Hahaha - The whole culture of the 50's in the US is worlds away from where we are now brother!
-
Fender's main problem is that they're trying to shut the stable door.... about 40 years after the horse has bolted, died of natural causes and been sent to the glue factory. :|
+1
and also, the fact that fender are only concerned with suing the companies which it sees as a threat- i.e. those companies who can make a better guitar for a better price. they should put all that litigating money into making better guitars.
and i agree that they've become generic by now. even if they hadn't, copyrights and patents etc. lapse after a certain amount of time.
-
On a related note, had a Suhr 10th Anniversary in the hop today as it was in to get a set of Rebel Yells.
Great sounding guitar, great player, but had a REALLY clunky selector and wobbly pots, it had arrived with the chap one day previously straight from Suhr :?
Still, that aside, hell of a guitar.
-
I think its a wrong decision myself - Leo Fender and team actually designed those guitar shapes - they were shapes that no one else had even thought of before (unlike Gibson, who just cut away the spanish guitar shape) - the Fender team put years of design into those shapes and unimaginative bandwagon jumpers like Suhr and others just came along and copied it cynically to make money out of someone else's design genius and then charged a premium for making guitars someone else sweated over and risked their entire livelihood over. That seems like theft to me, even if Fender are now a multinational (they were'nt in 1959 or 1983!).
broadly speaking, I thought the same thing - Fender designed the Strat and Tele from scratch, it's their product. back in the 50s/60s I think that companies wanted to set one another appart from the competition by coming up with their own designs so protecting the body shape etc. probably wasn't an issue.
that aside, Fender started making rotten guitars through the 70s and I can see why the boutique builders started to get more and more business - it's about being able to get something familiar, but tweaked the way players want (to a higher spec).
all that said, I think it's fair play to copy the classic shapes now - none of them have made a fuss and protected their designs well enough so it's tough shite now.
maybe Fender and Gibson should start making a better product and show the small guys how it's done to regain their 'lost' market share. of course we all know they won't because it's all about the bottom line and what level of QC is 'acceptable' rather than aiming to be the best.