Gibson "Play Authentic" video

Dave_W

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2015
Messages
1,342
Reaction score
4,315
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).
 

dissaffected

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2015
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
2,199
Something that has always driven me nuts about Gibson is that their pups are some of the best stock pups I have played and, to my ear, distinguish them from the competition. You cant get true Gibson noises out of a Heritage that you get from Gibson. I have owned two Heritages and it aint the same. You cant get the same sound out of PRS or Edwards or..or or.

They keep talking crown and open book and all this other silliness. In the end I like Gibson for the noise it makes which, while a sum of the parts, you cannot get from others due to their pups. Their pups are vastly under rated even by Gibson.

The fact that they do not get what their strength is......that is their weakness
 
Last edited:

Dolebludger

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
14,460
Reaction score
13,181
The test for design patent infringement should be (and has been in many court cases) whether the alleged infringing product misleads the public into thinking it is the patent owner’s product. If the answer is “no”., then there is no harm no foul. I know of no guitars ( except for “ Chibsons” that bear Gibson’s name) that meet that test.

Gibson needs to concentrate on making their guitars available for players to try out, and building them so that their performance justifies the price.
 

jaycoyoyo

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2013
Messages
655
Reaction score
601
I have to wonder how long the writer of this video script was stewing over this. Talk about butthurt...

-Jay
 

jb_abides

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
393
Reaction score
413
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.
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...

Didn't see anything wrong with the video
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!"

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.
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.

Certainly if you can hold IP on the body shapes you must allow them to pursue infringement on the book, crown, diamond, too! Hell, I'd even think their inlay shapes count.

My take is this is neophyte communications, stepping on your own d1ck in public.

Better move would be to quietly have lawyers send letters, NOT appeal to consumers on this.

Ultimately: Tempest in a teapot.
 

OldBenKenobi

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
7,420
Reaction score
8,662
Meh, I don't really respect trademark law.

By putting so much stock in their trademarked designs, all of which are purely aesthetic, they're telling me they're shook, and that they can't sell a guitar on its merits outside of the headstock and body shape.

Pussies.

Imagine if the Les Paul headstock and body weren't trademarked, and any manufacturer could use them. You'd have the expected flood of super cheap, low end Chinese instruments, but you'd also have very high quality instruments (likely built in Japan) that sell for half of what a Gibson sells for.

Actually, you don't have to imagine because this is the playing field in Japan. And it all seems to work out pretty well for everyone, including Gibson.

It's the same issue I have with DiMarzio, except my hatred for DiMarzio burns way deeper because of how petty and wrong and fraudulent their trademarks are. Pussies apparently can't sell pickups unless they're the only place you can get double creams or chrome tops.
 

Dolebludger

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
14,460
Reaction score
13,181
Well, court cases over design patents haven’t exactly gone in Gibson’s favor. It just needs to make guitars that perform worth their price, and make them available in most music stores for us to try out. If I try out a $2k Gibson for example and find it improves my playing that much, I’ll buy it. But if it is difficult distance wise for me to try one, and if those I’ve tried aren’t worth the price to me, I won’t, and haven’t.
 

Pete M

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
6,056
Reaction score
9,159
This is just clickbait. People have been copying Gibson's electric guitars since the 1950s. If the big cheese says do something about fakes, then just do it. No need to "warn" everybody in a Youtube video. Everyone already knows where to go and how much to pay if they want an authentic Gibson which isn't as good as a 50's example. Which in itself creates the market that they're whinging about. If their guitars were more affordable and were true to the originals there wouldn't be any need for this nonsense. They also already have a long history (like decades) of sending nasty letters threatening legal action, all guitar builders are aware of this, and it got Gibson nowhere. Chinese fakes polluting the gene pool en masse is what really hurts their brand in this context, but they can't do a damn thing about it, it seems. It's not just the guitar industry that has a problem of cheap fakes coming out of Asia.
 
Last edited:

Skit

Witch Doctor
Joined
Jun 10, 2009
Messages
5,118
Reaction score
4,467
Wasn’t that bad. It would seem the new owners want to protect the brand.
They already lost that battle to PRS back in 2005. :dunno: In 2016 they lost a case against UK distributor JHS guitars also.

If Gibson were serious about counterfeits they could spend an eternity getting all the counterfeits off e-bay. It is rife with them. There are also tons of utube vids with people hyping them. Go for it Gibson.
 
Last edited:

RAG7890

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
15,721
Reaction score
25,722




Seriously though, Gibson should concentrate on making great Guitars rather than making stupid Videos.

The public has been fed so much marketing BS by Gibson over the years it’s time to focus on the main game.

They only have themselves to blame for the current situation IMHO.

At one point in time I owned nearly 30 Gibson Historics.........don’t own any now.

Something to think about Gibson. ;)

:cheers2:
 

paruwi

Kraut-Rocker
Super Mod
Joined
Dec 24, 2009
Messages
20,753
Reaction score
28,519
poor level - IMO of course

387550
 
Last edited:




Top