Gibson loses V trademark in EU


Senior Member
Apr 22, 2017
Reaction score
We will have to agree to disagreee on this one. Jackson makes a V. Dean Makes a V. Epiphone makes a V. (They count if you are claiming punters won't know better) Pretty sure ESP and BC Rich have made them. Ibanez and Hamer also if memory serves and I have not even begun to talk about the boutique guys. You have to live under a rock to not be aware of all of these other mfg's making V's. Back in the 80's especially they were everywhere. The tribe elders may only see Gibson. The rest of us a little younger didn't come up only lusting after Fender and Gibson like that. We had a bonanza of of other builders that captured our imagination

^ this.Excellent! And we all complain about new blood not playing guitar.If this is it, if this is what it takes,i say let it fly.Let evolution procede.According to the article,Gibson has not lost its balls on the patent,just a piece of it's left nut. Sometimes that is what it takes to proliferate, to be re-born.

I'll add,in Europe,home of metal popularity today,guitar still thrives,and the derivatives of the iconic shape are the market normal there.(like the article says)

Good decision.


Senior Member
Apr 30, 2009
Reaction score
As I posted just a couple of days ago, the whole "Disney and the Copyright Act" business is an urban myth. The CA1998 simply brought US law into line with the rest of the world, so that we could join the Berne Convention like every other developed nation. Word Wide Rodent, slimy as they are, had nothing to do with it. And Mickey Mouse will enter the public domain at the end of 2023.

Here's the scoop:

Here's the Wiki on the Berne Convention

and I'm accepting bets on whether Mickey Mouse will enter the public domain at the end of 2023.

Bill Hicklin

Senior Member
Nov 3, 2014
Reaction score
Not exactly an unbiased blog post (nor any actual evidence of Disney lobbying. I note especially that this passage
Disney’s lobbying paid off in 1976 when Congress passed legislation which changes the copyright scheme such that individual authors were granted protection for their life, plus an additional 50 years, and for works authored by a corporation

Alleges Disney lobbying, but makes NO MENTION AT ALL of the fact that the CA76 adopted Berne standards-so that the US could join Berne (you know, every other developed nation on earth).

The US fo almost 200 years was an outlier in the international community, with its fixed-term-after-publication-date system, as opposed to everyone elses"life + N decades" formulation.

I note also that nowhere in his post - which is why I regard it as disingenuous, - does he even mention the distinction between works by individual authors, and works-for-hire. That is an all-important difference and leaving it out leaves me questioning his intellectual honesty.

Latest Threads