Members BeeTL Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 At least, that's what I think it is: http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=serial&entry=85218173 It looks like they're trying to lock down the Firebird shape. I wonder how this will turn out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Alex_SF Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 You can't directly link to the application, but if anyone wants to search it it's serial number 85218173, for this design: Looks like they also have S/N 85216721 for the Flying V headstock shape. They also made an intent-to-use application last year for the Corvus body shape, S/N 85087171. I have no idea why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BeeTL Posted February 9, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 Fixed the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Reverse Entropy Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 Interesting. I wonder if it's normal to trademark something that has been openly copied by others for so many years ? I know they created it originally, but don't seem to have tried to protect it before now. OTOH, I doubt there will be some massive, coordinated and well financed battle over this by competitors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MyNameIsMok... Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 Interesting. I wonder if it's normal to trademark something that has been openly copied by others for so many years ? I know they created it originally, but don't seem to have tried to protect it before now. Happens all the time. Sometimes an object or idea does fit the trademark application until it becomes popular and copied, ironically. For instance, the Beatles original use of the Apple name and logo. It was not widely associated with the Beatles as much as their actual band name, so Steve Jobs was able to take it and run all the way to the bank. Now imagine if they were the Apples with a Beatle record label. The name would be so popular that the iPhone would have to be released under another company name. That's my layman's understanding anyway. Let a real blues lawyer chime in for accuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Alex_SF Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 For instance, the Beatles original use of the Apple name and logo. It was not widely associated with the Beatles as much as their actual band name, so Steve Jobs was able to take it and run all the way to the bank. Now imagine if they were the Apples with a Beatle record label. Theoretically, there shouldn't be any conflict if the two companies stay in separate business areas. DELTA is used by different companies for an airline, a dental insurance plan, and faucets, for instance, with no conflict. If the goods/services are related, however, there could be a conflict. The record label actually sued the computer company in the late 70s / early 80s, when there really was not a basis to find a conflict. They settled, and agreed not to get into each others' areas of business. But the record label reopened the dispute later on, as the computer company got into multimedia and then digital music. I think they've only reached an agreement on coexisting in recent years, which is why the Beatles' catalog apparently wasn't available on iTunes until last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MyNameIsMok... Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 "Dammit Jim I'm a musician not a Starfleet officer!" Theoretically, there shouldn't be any conflict if the two companies stay in separate business areas. DELTA is used by different companies for an airline, a dental insurance plan, and faucets, for instance, with no conflict. If the goods/services are related, however, there could be a conflict. Thanks for that, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BeeTL Posted February 9, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 Here's an interesting article on the whole patent/trademark situation and how it's playing out in the world of guitars:Shapes of Things: A Brief History of the Peculiar Behind-the-Scenes War Over Guitar Designs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Elias Graves Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 They also made an intent-to-use application last year for the Corvus body shape, S/N 85087171. I have no idea why. CORVUS X!EG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ashasha Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 It'd be much better if there was a court injunction or a cease and desist order filed against Gibson for building the Firebird X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wulver Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 CORVUS X!EG I have a horrible sinking feeling that you're correct... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members vcnyls Posted February 9, 2011 Members Share Posted February 9, 2011 Here's an interesting article on the whole patent/trademark situation and how it's playing out in the world of guitars:Shapes of Things: A Brief History of the Peculiar Behind-the-Scenes War Over Guitar Designs. As some of you know, I'm a intellecutal property attorney by trade. I always reseist jumping into legal discussions on the forums because 1) I don't think it's appropriate to be giving anything that could be construed as legal advice online in a forum setting and 2) no offense to everyone here, but I don't want to be the go-to legal guy whenever this debate comes up or someone has a personal copyright/trademark/patent question. That said, the article that BeeTL posted is a very good overview of the law around copyring gutiar design (no, I didn't write the article, though I have often thought of doing so and wish I had)! It's worth the read if you are interestd in this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Reverse Entropy Posted February 10, 2011 Members Share Posted February 10, 2011 It'd be much better if there was a court injunction or a cease and desist order filed against Gibson for building the Firebird X. I'm sure Mad King Henry and the recent Firebird X have everything to do with suddenly deciding the Firebird design is a treasured family heirloom that must be protected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.