Gibson Loses Its Firebird Guitar Body Shape Trademark in The EU

[VictorB]

Whoops.

"After Gibson lost its appeal against the loss of its trademark on the Flying V guitar body shape in the European Union in June, it’s lost another trademark with the Firebird body shape."

Gibson loses its Firebird guitar body shape trademark in the EU

The company's 50 year wait to file trademark cited as a contributing factor

www.musicradar.com

 

[Brians Evil Twin]

 

[TheX]

This is probably just the first of many.

 

[edro]

Gib should have an auction to decide WHO will patent the Firebird X and how much Gib would have to pay 'em to take it....



Nothing like building something stupid and saying down the road "Well so & so patented the damn thing, tweren't us...

 

[Olds442]

good, now we can get nice things.

 

[oicu812]

This right here is the case:

“Guitar body shapes may perhaps function as trademarks for a tiny club of expert and discerning guitarists," the EUIPO stated, "but not for the average amateur, who is the relevant public in assessing distinctive character in this case.”

I think their assessment is the exact opposite of what it should be.The "relevant public' is the target market. Guitar body shapes should function as trademarks for all guitarists, not the so called "tiny club of expert and discerning guitarists" who know what they are looking at. The "average amateur" may not, and Gibson doesn't believe they should lose the sale because another maker is using what they see as their body shape.

It wasn't gonna happen with the EU. They are gonna take care of their own, and I am sure Wilfer lined a few pockets.

"EUIPO stated in relation to the Firebird body shape that it "does not consider this to be significantly different from the normal style of electric guitars".

I think the statement says it all. Anyone here define what "normal style of electric guitars" means?

 

[fleahead]

This is probably just the first of many.

According to the article, they already got fucked properly on the V earlier in the year.

 

[disaffected]

but, but.....The Gibson lawyers won this one. Lawyers 2 Gibson 0

 

[edro]

 

[JTM45]

Hopefully Jackson will start making the firebird again, those were great metal guitars

 

[Crotch]

Play Authentic

 

[MikeyTheCat]

Oh well.

 

[Tim Plains]

"Interestingly, the EUIPO put forward the idea in its judgment that even though guitarists may be able to identify a guitar's outline, it's more relevant whether a non-player can. And it doesn't consider this to be the case for the Firebird."

I wonder how this logic would apply to all trademarks. Any non-driver can use the Mercedes Benz logo? Any non-burger eater can use the Golden Arches?

 

[Uncle Vinnie]

My life is forever changed.

 

[dspelman]

The problem with Gibson losing these cases is that their "cease and desist" letters are more often going to be tossed in the trash. It's headstocks next.

 

[Brians Evil Twin]

The problem with Gibson losing these cases is that their "cease and desist" letters are more often going to be tossed in the trash. It's headstocks next.

Why is that a problem?

That's where they belong.

 

[paruwi]

I wonder how this logic would apply to all trademarks. Any non-driver can use the Mercedes Benz logo?

It's not about any logo,
It's more like Mercedes Benz would claim a certain shape of an automobile as their own trademark

 

[oicu812]

I dunno. For example, most mid-engine cars, Ferrari, Lambo, Audi, and the new C8 Vette all follow a similar body style. Only so much you can do with a mid-engine and aerodynamics. One could say form and function work closely here.

On the other hand, guitar bodies relative to performance are completely independent of shape one could claim. May not actually be the case, but the claim could be made. So the difference in appearance and performance with the mid-engine car (not really any options) versus the 6 string electric is totally different.

This is why Gibson and Fender want to have the body shapes they designed trademarked, as is the Mercedes star.

 

[Olds442]

It's headstocks next.

do they care about the firebird's headstock?

i know they're picky about the open book.

 

[dspelman]

do they care about the firebird's headstock?

i know they're picky about the open book.

Gibson is trying to backtrack trademarks on its bodies, and they've been claiming them to be trademarked all these years (they weren't). That's why we've seen other manufacturers shaving the points of cutaways, etc. They even tried to claim the whole singlecut body style, and lost that one to PRS. I think we're going to find that Gibson can not defend their claims to trademarks on not only their bodies but also their headstocks, and that will include the open book.

Fender has long since given up trying to assert legal protection for the body shapes they produce; the strat and tele (for example) are essentially public domain at this point, even though Fender may object to the use of "Stratocaster" and "Telecaster" to identify them (which is why we refer to them as t-style or s-style or any one of another similar conventions).