Gibson lost that case because the courts ruled that PRS' design wasn't infringing. The courts did not invalidate Gibson's trademark on the LP body shape. It's still in force (unfortunately, IMHO).Gibson already tried taking that legal tack, and got smacked down.
423 F.3d 539
GIBSON GUITAR CORP., Plaintiff-Appellee,
PAUL REED SMITH GUITARS, LP, Defendant-Appellant.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Argued: December 10, 2004.
Decided and Filed: September 12, 2005.
I haven't been a fan of ANY of his videos, and agree he comes off as a huckster. Wonder if he's writing these, or who gets final edit, release approval. Obviously there's some fine-tuning to be had...Terrible vibe, tone deaf delivery and straight up wrong from a legal standpoint.
Mark, please stop delivering script read heavy handed didactic pieces. This is not your strength. Your strength is in the off the cuff and in the dry conversational humor.
You’re coming across on video as being really uncomfortable and kind of creepy. Which is really unfortunate, Considering how likable and fun your videos for Norm were.
If these scripts are coming down from the corporate above ? Then I’d suggest you stand up and take control over your own personal “brand” before Gibson ruins it.
Mostly agree. I think they are going more after Chibson behavior not PRS SC or ESP. The message is just muddled. And they don't need to strong-arm potential customers with the negatives of going after other companies. I see this as poor copy to back up someone's clever tag-line of 'Play Authentic' when they could have touted the legacy of innovation as desirable - and leave it like that. Cultivate the desire. "Only a Gibson is Good Enough!"Didn't see anything wrong with the video
I think the message was muddled per above. Again, he stated this after specifically talking headstock shape, crown, spilt diamonds, etc. which I took as going after more egregious lifts of IP e.g. Chibsons, rather than PRS SC, ESP, etc.A few seconds past the 2 minute mark, he says that any copy of any of the designs he mentioned is in fact a counterfeit.
That's not just false, it's a goddamned lie. A copy may be infringing, but it's not a counterfeit unless it claims to be a Gibson.
Gibson does have trademarks on most of its body shapes, he's right about that. But there was no need for a video like that. Companies go after trademark infringers every day, but it takes a special kind of stupid to make public threats.
They already lost that battle to PRS back in 2005. In 2016 they lost a case against UK distributor JHS guitars also.Wasn’t that bad. It would seem the new owners want to protect the brand.