Gibson can maintain trademark without resorting to lawsuit....
In any case, Gibson's previous lawsuits were against makers of actual guitars, not children's toys. For the record, these things are not actually made of paper. They're plastic, but very thin. They're toys, plain and simple.
You tricked me into reading this thread by using the word Gibsom!
![]()
You who are complaining about Gibson's move are reacting without thinking. Gibson is not wrong here.
Gibson has already lost this matter. There are plenty of other Les Paul shaped guitars
Once again, they are suing Wowwee based on the shape of a toy which does not compete with Gibson's guitar.
If Wowwee were producing a guitar in the same shape as a Les Paul, they would have a leg to stand on.
If Gibson is doing this just to get their name on the product, they could have done it without suing. In fact, if Gibson had any desire to actually compete, they could produce their own toy guitar using their own logo and finish designs. To be honest they would probably outsell the Wowwee product.
Lets not forget that Gibson has already tried this, and failed. They went up against PRS regarding the shape of the guitar.
God forbid any company bother to compete anymore...why not just bring lawsuit instead![]()
I agree on principle,its like an unlicensed product. No different than walmart making and selling Justin Beiber T-shirts and not paying his cut.
This has nothing to do with the other company. It is to keep the trademark shapes out of public domain. Arguing the merits of the Wowwee or say that Gibson is not bother to compete, shows a misunderstanding of lawsuits and business.
That's such crap. What about all the companies that make copies of the Les Paul, the SG and the 335 which are often near-perfect duplicates of the Gibsons except for slight differences in the headstock, not to mention the many Explorer lookalikes that have the SAME hockey stick or inverted V headstocks as the Gibsons, and yet never wind up in court?
That's such crap. What about all the companies that make copies of the Les Paul, the SG and the 335 which are often near-perfect duplicates of the Gibsons except for slight differences in the headstock, not to mention the many Explorer lookalikes that have the SAME hockey stick or inverted V headstocks as the Gibsons, and yet never wind up in court?
Again you are missing the point. Gibson has either had their day in court with those companies and the court had ruled that the head stock shape is the trademarked peice and it wasn't being infringed upon or they felt that the court has made it clear in other cases that the trademark was not being infringed upon. The point is the protection of anything that they have trademarked. If they don't then their trademark shape can be used by anyone for free because it will be concidered part of the public domain. The ruling of the court that these companies are not infringing on the trademark has the same result It keeps it out of public domain.
Gibson was not suing for monatary gain in most of the cases. It was suing to get them to stop using Gibson's shapes that are trademarked or at least to get a ruling that the shapes are not simular enough to be considered infringement. Such a ruling keeps it from becoming public domain.l
Now you can resort to calling this crap or you can listen and learn or maybe do some research. Gibson is not in the wrong here.![]()