Just as the hype of the new 2019 line up was starting to die down - Gibson decided to get back in the headlines by suing Dean over these 7 trademarks. What do you think about this situation? troglysguitarshow.com/2019/06/20/gibson-sues-deans-parent-company-for-14m-over-trademark-infringement/ reverb.grsm.io/CurrentInventory
This is kind of crappy because Dean makes good guitars if not better than Gibson in some ways the Explorer copy which I've played before play better than the Gibson in so many ways the flying device on the other hand is also a great guitar I think that they're both equally good at the Flying V but I got to give it to Dean Gibson needs to get their stuff together
If Gibson had done this back in the 70s they would have almost certainly lost. It'll be very hard to prove that any of these designs are really infringing, and the threat of suit itself is useful - they lose that if they sue and lose the case, they can't threaten anymore. And realistically, how is Gibson going to sue Dean and win without making a precedent for Martin to sue Gibson under? So both Gibson and Fender decided way back then to only pursue exact copies of their headstock designs. They did threaten several makers and cause them to make small changes to their headstock designs, but they didn't even risk threatening over body shapes. For decades. I'm not sure but it's quite possible that Dean was one of the ones that changed their headstock shape just enough to comply with Gibsons demands way back when they first started. I predict Deans lawyer is probably going to use the word 'laches' in their filings, a lot. Would this affect decisions to buy Gibson? Possibly, I don't like litigious companies and I do try to avoid doing business with the worst of them. But realistically, I wasn't likely to buy Gibson anyway. I prefer the used market, and even there while I like them it's obvious from the prices other folks like them more, comparatively speaking. Could this help Dean? Possibly, both by exposure, and if it prompted them to do some redesigns. Their models *are* slavishly derivative (which is generally true across the industry) and their headstocks are particularly bad. I'd love to see some new designs in the mainstream guitar market.
@@laughingdaffodils5450 I'd think they'd be MORE likely to prevail in a lawsuit back in the 70s, wouldn't they? Tons of companies have gotten away with it since then.
I still remember Gibson suing prs, back in the late 2000’s over the prs singlecut. Personally, if I owned a guitar company, I’d wonder why people chose to abandon my brand, and pick another, and work to better myself. Guess that’s just me though.
Fender never got a trademark on the body style. They were denied because, by the time they tried, it was too late. Strat shaped guitars were everywhere by that point. Gibson has Trademark on the Flying V and the Explorer and the Headstock and their logos and the product name Hummingbird. (And the SG and ES etc.) Fun fact, in a separate action, Armadillo has challenged the ES body shape trademark.
@@TheScottJeter it's worth mentioning that Gibson didn't get the trademark for the Flying V shape until 1997. It's a big reason why they lost their cases in Europe. You can't really sue a company if they've created a guitar before you have a trademark.
In answer to your question. I think Gibson are too late. The shapes they try to protect are now too common and generic. The horse has bolted. Too late to shut the stable door.
The Gran Sport (copied body and headstock is really close) is only 6 years old. The legal action for this started when it was only 4 years old. That one's ripe. Luna Fauna Hummingbird is ripe too. I agree with you on Dean's V and Z. Those models are 40ish years old around the time of the original filing.
gavin Reid there’s actually a legal basis to support this- the question raised to Gibson as to why it has taken them so long to file the claim against Dean, considering that Dean has been making a V style similar to Gibson’s V since the 70’s... And, Gibson was turned down recently in Europe for the V trademark; they’ve appealed several times, and have lost... they’ve got like one more appellate court to try... The reason that Gibson has filed the lawsuit in Texas (for US Federal Court they could file in any state at any Federal Court location) is because Texas has a history of being sympathetic to plaintiffs (In this case the plaintiff would be Gibson) filing copyright infringement cases, and the judgements in these cases in Texas has been awarded to the plaintiffs more frequently than to defendants, by a pretty wide margin. As to why that Texas is like that, I’m not sure. FWIW
“90% of the headstock is similar, it’s just that 10% open book part that’s different”, I think that the 90% you’re referring to is called “any headstock on any guitar” 😂🤣
Drew Gibbs i wonder if this push dean to come out with a new headstock that looks even more badass than gibson :o my favorite hesdstock right now has to be d angelico ny though!
You say that but that’s because the headstock has been copied so much. That’s not because it can’t be done any differently. That’s you being blinded by infringed designs flooding your eyes.
@@ScribblyDave Folk guitar headstocks were based on classical guitars but more solid because steel strings use more tension. So when Gibson started, 3+3 was standard. Epiphone, Martin, others were already making folk guitars and archtops with that headstock style. Gibson used an open book scrolled design on the top of their headstock to set it apart. It is the distinctive part. A distinctive part is what is required to define a trademark. So the "10%" is actually a significant part of their trademark. Dean's Gran Sport headstock is very close to Gibson's. Whether it's too close the judge will say.
@@AlejandroFloresmotorsport Careful calling people stupid when it's you that completely missed the point of their post. He wasn't saying Dean made them FIRST, he was pointing out that if Dean making them was truly a copyright infringement, why didn't Gibson sue Dean forty years ago when they first started making them?
True dumbfucks, like yourself, have been saying similar things for years. And yet countless thousands of professional musicians have been making great music on Gibsons for decades. Congrats, you're a true moron. Maybe one day you'll have an original thought, though I doubt it.
Trademarks are designed to protect consumers. How many guitarists really purchase a Dean thinking it was a Gibson..... Please. Who invented the rectangular door? Then should send cease and decist letters to their competition too...
There is a difference between a product found by a company/person than a product found by an anonymous person. With that logic you can literally steal anything.
Gibson should focus on improving the quality of its instruments instead of BS court cases. They cant even compare to a quality Dean guitar. What next? Sue ESP?
They already did. They stopped production of the Explorer shapes used in the James Hetfield Signature models and ESP had to redesign the shape "enough"
But...but if someone were to see these guitars in a smoky bar...they would be instantly baffled. I wish I were making that up....that was gibsons argument with PRS back in the day.
Gibson should focus more on making great guitars, rather than chasing after low-end, entry-level guitar companies who actually make guitars for the masses!
I actually commented this elsewhere, but I feel it deserves to be here too. Gibson is huge, no doubt about it. That being said, I have never held a Gibson. In the pawn shops and small guitar business's in my area there are few Gibson's and what are there I can't afford. There are a lot of Deans, a lot cheaper, and being more accessable, that puts them in the foreground of people's minds. Here, Dean is King
Just Gonna Get Better you have to level up your vision and use reverb. Who said you are supposed to buy from a local place? And if you are afraid of the shipping cost its not as much as others say and sometimes it is free.
1 - ran out of money 2 - went bankrupt 3 - need money 4 - have to sue someone to get money 5 - their guitars are trash 6 - the Chinese outsource parts might be exposed 7 - still trash 8 - need more money 9 - overcharge for their guitars 10 - still need money
@@TheProTalentGaming i have six gibsons, of varying ages and I'll even admit that my newer ones are garbage compared to my 60s and 70s guitars. Stop being a fanboy.
As a Gibson fan... I disagree with what they are doing. I just think they are just pissing off a lot of musicians. Instead of putting so much resources into these lawsuit. Maybe they should concentrate on building the brand. This is going backfire.
@@greg7656 well theyve only left it 40 bloody years, and about 20 manufacturers too late hahaha i think the time to sue has passed, can you imagine Fender going out to sue all the Strat and Tele copies? half the market would disappear. If anything Gibson should just focus on making the best quality guitars of those styles, that way people who dont want to spend 4k on a guitar can still have the shapes and sounds of their favourite artists, this move will only piss people off
@@deanlejeune5005 I get that Dean, and you might be absolutely correct about the statute of limitations or whatever its called - that's a legal matter that the courts will determine - but you lose me at the "people who don't want to spend 4K but still have the shapes and sounds of their favorite artists." Guess what? Those shapes are protected! There is no inalienable right to having the guitar shape you want. Those shapes were developed and are maintained by a company at great cost. Life's unfair that way - I'd love an LP Jr but my maxed out credit cards say no, so no it is. Imagine if some cheapo car company made a near-exact replica of a Ferrari. Would you expect Ferrari to say, Ah well, let's just focus on making a better car and let the thieves counterfeit to their little hearts content?
@@greg7656 Sure they are technically 'protected' but if Gibson cared about them why havent they protected them for the past 50 years? Considering the fact they didnt care to sue companies back in the day, why should they be able to turn around and sue companies now? Especially considering they themselves have copied guitar shapes before? I understand the analogy but the missing point is that Ferrari hasnt let other companies copy them, they sue straight away. Because Gibson and Fender stopped caring about the companies making copies for decades they have kinda lost the right to complain in my opinion. Like, how has ESP been able to get away with what they do? Or Harley Benton? Should boutique guitar companies be destroyed for using a LP as a template? To not care about 'protecting' the shapes for 50 years and then try to sue companies because your failing as a business is a bit a cunt move in my opinion, and it seems in the opinion of many others. Honestly it comes off as a desperate attempt to hamstring the competition because the competition is out performing them, generally at a lower price point too. If Gibson wants to make it pay-to-play thats fine but they should have to pay up all the shapes and designs they have also copied, otherwise its purely hypocritical
@@greg7656 yeah. So they should have been consistent from the start and they should be targeting real counterfeiters. Not sue whoever is accessible on a whim because they money is drying up.
They should know damn well Schecter has ripped the found out of the V and Explorer. ESP has ripped off damn near the entire line. There's hardly a single company that doesn't have an ES style guitar.
@@gothampops oh okay, just seems a bit targeted considering how many brands copy their style of guitars but as long as everyone copying gets a fair shake i dont have a problem with it
Says someone who has never invented anything, put their life savings into producing it, and then had someone steal it. You're correct about knowledge. But "knowledge" isn't the same as me taking a book you wrote, claiming it's mine, and selling it. Or taking a guitar you invented, financed, and made popular, and slapping my name on it and selling it. Get real, fool.
Nicola Tesla invented pretty much everything we enjoy in the modern world (electricly speaking). And Edison and Marconi ripped off his patents and work.If you're obsessed with money and notoriety You will invent very little and become a greedy old Theif ( like Edison) or you can keep pushing boundaries and become a legend (like Tesla)
@@davecarsley8773 Anything else than insulting somebody you don't even know? Who stole anything? Nothing was stolen. The guitars designs and whatever are still there. The were copied, nothing else. Perhaps you don't really get the concept of evolution, but all products and everything that was ever developed is rooted on previous knowledge and ideas. When great people say they stand on the shoulders of giants, then they hit the nail on the head. The copy right laws are from a different millennium. Today, enforcing them in the ways Gibson seems to be going about destroys more than they safe.
5 лет назад
Appreciate someone else that understands that it is absolutely impossible to steal an idea. Funny enough I had this discussion with my friend on his guitar company. I said be so innovative that by the time people copy you, you're three steps ahead. Gibson needs to see Dean as a fire under their fat lazy asses to make a better product. Even if we insist on IP, given the rate if change in this world, it should be cheap to acquire and only last 3 years. If you can't get your product to the top spot and hold the market in that time, maybe it's better you do something else. IP is now doing more harm to human flourishing than anything else. Goddamn patent trolls.
5 лет назад
@@davecarsley8773 can't steal an idea. If I steal something from you, then I have it now and you don't. Competition drives the world forward and benefits us all.
I think they must know that but feel the cost in fighting a case will be enough to make other builders think twice still its bloody stupid if they worked on improving there brand instead most would buy Gibson in the first place
@@Wyatt42069 Or they could at least get some fkn quality control? seriously, my fuckin Harley Benton came with less factory mistakes than the LPs from Gibson. If im paying 3k for a guitar it better be a fucking good guitar or ill get one elsewhere
There's only so many shapes for guitars! Of course there will be similarities! Reeks of desperation for gibson grasping! "We made the wheel therefore no one else gets to make a wheel as we invented the shape!"
Went to a music store this week-end. 85% of the Gibson there had quality issues... The same models in the Epiphone range look and felt a lot better for more than half the price. In no other market would Gibson survive!
Your guitar store is full of old stock. Gibson addressed many of the causes behind the past few years' quality concerns. (Primarily morale, lighting, too much moving guitars around and folks not allowed to reject a guitar, only the final QC could.) They do need to work on price point and continue to improve their designs and improve quality even more. Which they could better do if the money used to execute these legal wranglings was reinvested in the company to modernize and automate and improve working conditions.
The headstocks aren't even CLOSE. You lost your cred there, bubba. Never mind that Orville stole the open book carve from mandolins and guitars made WAY before he used it for his. 🎸
This video sounds like the guy talking is sticking up for a shitty guitar company who likes to bully better guitar companys because they are on the verge of going all the way out gibson is stuck in the 50's and way way over priced dean is a good guitar for way way lower priced that plays way better i love dean .jackson .schecter.bc.rich.moser.ibanez.esp.solar.kick ass i hate gibson and i really dont like fender other then that every other company is cool in my book
He is making a point that will likely come up in court proceedings. Your opinion on the subject is solely your own. Frankly, if you think this point won't be made, and that the judge will be a guitar expert you are being foolish. He made some good points.
@@williamcordell1501 yeah well gibson cant do nothing about it now since these designs have been out for 30 and 40 years if gibson wanted to do something about it they should have then not now gibson is falling and falling fast and after this they are probely done
@@williamcordell1501 Apparently my "sole" opinion is held by the majority of people here and you don't disagree either, and no, he didn't mention it because it will come up in court proceedings - he blatantly and falsely stated his opinion that they are "close" and by design standards - no they aren't any more than a rectangle is close to a square. The only interesting point he made is in the fact that actual "close" i.e. the "V" and "Explorer" weren't litigated decades ago.
Big misstep. The market is saturated with models that are inspired by Gibson instruments. Whether they have grounds or not, this was the worst idea to do now.
It's been like that for a long time now and while many companies had copied a design at least you can find a similar style in many price ranges honestly companies copying Fender / gibson designs was a great move as some musicians don't want to spend $2K on a gibson explorer when another company could make a better version for less
Fender will get on people if they use their peghead shape without licensing it, though. They've licensed it all over the place in parts, not sure how that works (I guess if you use a licensed part as a builder, you are probably OK).
I was about to ask about that lol i have the Epiphone sc series guitar and it is a lot like a fender. It's not bad either but I still see fender written all over it.
I was going to point that out. There are a ton of guitar companies that model their guitars after other companies guitars. Including subsidiaries of Gibson itself.
@@TheRobinlove25 They still do make Deans in the USA .. In Clearwater Florida at the Dean Custom shop. They run around $3000, depending on which model.
Epiphone opened their guitar manufacturing business almost 30 years later then gibson did, if anything Gibson copied Epiphone, and then as a last stand to conquer the guitar world Epiphone was bought out by Gibson in 1957 had that not happened, we would be seeing a different story today
The Dean ML shape was created as a hybrid of the Explorer and Flying V - and improving on both designs, as it would be easy to play sitting down. (You can even do a classical style position!) I’d say it’s an even bet as to whether the teenage Dean Zelinsky even KNEW about the Moderne, back in the pre-Internet days, when he first created the ML. Seriously, the design was done by a high school kid doodling pictures of guitars! This is not a good look for Gibson. This reminds everyone of when Henry J.-era Gibson sued Paul Reed Smith in the mid-‘00s. They did briefly get a friendly ruling, which forced PRS to stop making their single-cutaway guitars. Then it was soon overturned on appeal, PRS came back even stronger, and Gibson’s image as a villain was there for the next 10-plus years.
I agree with all that you've stated, and the moderne VS. the ML is a joke, they're nothing alike... But Dean did definitely inspire the V and Explorer off of the gibson guitars. On a side note, I think Dean's the only other big manufacturer that uses fret nibs, well i've only ever seen them on Deans. Not saying that this is something that's patented and Dean shouldn't be able to do nibs lol, just to point out that a lot of what Zelinsky has done has been gibson inspired, and for him to say "the accusations are baseless" is laughable *Think of it this way, if let's say Kiesel, Solar, or some other well known *small* brand made an ML or Razorback body guitar, you can bet they would get sued by Dean, I have absolutely no doubt about that* Not defending gibson nor Dean, just pointing out some stuff. And this is a very stupid move from Gibson, but this started in 2017 so someone is doing this for the free publicity, could be gibson (no such thing as bad press) or Dean or both lol Should these types of "shape" patents even exist ? That's another discussion I'm surprised Gibson hasn't gone after Edwards (ESP)
Everybody copies from everyone else. For example, remember how Gibson sued PRS for "stealing" the Les Paul body shape? Well, Gibson had actually stolen THAT from the custom-built guitars by Paul Bigsby, made famous by country player Merle Travis in the late 1940s. (Also notable for Leo Fender copying the headstock design.) I think the ONE thing that Gibson has on Dean here is the brand name of a "Hummingbird" acoustic guitar. And Dean/Luna can throw enough countersuits, along with other companies that are teaming up here, to keep it all down to a name change and an agreement to forget this ever happened.
@@erickleefeld4883 I saw on 5 Watt World that the "original" Les Paul was really an Epiphone that he was playing before signing with Gibson. Gibson didn't have a guitar for him to play so they just stuck their logo on the Epiphone.
Greedy Gibson starting to get desperate now that guitar sales are way down. Maybe if they sold a reasonably priced, quality guitar, they wouldn't be struggling so badly.
@@cainsmale5988 Out of 6 I have in my home, I only had one bad one that I sent back. other than that, they look, play and sound better than just about anything out there.
I'm an Explorer and Z aficionado (I have 2 Explorers and 4 Zs). Standard Zs have a maple top, binding, string-through design, THE Dean headstock, more rounded corners, and no pickguard (so different electronics routing). They're as different as a Strat and all the other Strat copies not made by FMIC (Kiesel Bolt/Delos, Schecter Sun Valley Shredder, Kramer Pacer, ESP Snapper Suhr's standards, etc). Gibson doesn't really have a leg to stand on, especially since it's only been *checks calendar, frantically punches numbers into calculator* 42 years since Dean launched the V, Z, and ML designs. I can't wait for them to sue ESP for the Viper, Eclipse, Snakebyte, and Arrow designs in 2030...
1. the open book headstock design predates the gibson company. There are many older guitars with a very similar headstock design. 2. how could you possibly mistake a dean V for a gibson? or a gibson modern for a dean ml?
@@jboyce92 Indeed,taste is subjective.Quality for the money is kinda not.I have fallen in love with (very few) some of them,wouldn't dare to buy a Gibson without checking it in person first.
I own a Gibson LP studio honestly I think it's just a high end epiphone made in USA maybe the more expensive models are better but I got mine at half the average price they sell used at so no complaints for the price
@@F_I_J_I_W_A_T_E_R Les Paul owned a tele. Legend has it that in a conversation with Eddy van Halen, Les said this: there are only three people in the world who can make good guitars you, me, and leo fender.
@@216trixie Half the new guitars he got had a crack under the pickguard, all of them had fretboards with tooling marks and half had cavities with splintered wood. They have a long way to go for the price tag.
They never released it. Oh, and Fender doesn't have a trademark on the Strat body style. They applied for one but were denied because there were already too many copies.
Trogly's dead wrong in this video. There are tons of 3-a-side headstocks and the Taylor headstock looks a lot more like the Gibson headstock than the Dean. Gibson is going to get prior art up and down their face. The fact that they waited this long has pretty much invalidated everything except claims on their logo. Anything else is going to be facing a shit-ton of prior art dating back to the 70s. It's kind of weird that Trogly didn't point out the ES-series made by pretty much everyone since then as well.
That video just made Gibson look like corporate bullies. As others have said, they have left it waaay too late. At this point the best plan to "protect the legacy" would be to build consistently high quality instruments.
Now when do they sue EMG for making replica humbuckers. Lol first thing i usually see on a gibson is a pickup swap. Which i don't entirely agree or disagree with.
@@horsefighter_69 They've tried to sue PRS and paperjams of all things before in the past. They seem to not care, and the people will just forget about it after it's over
They're not suing anyone to get their money back. As stated in the video, the monetary value they are seeking is absolute peanuts for a company of this magnitude.
@@nesicus That makes it worse, If 14 Million dollars is "peanuts" to them, why pursue the little guy for them. Hopefully they win and put that money toward their 500 Million dollar debt.
@@nesicus Yeah, right... they have been on the edge of bankruptcy as of late, but sure, it's not about the money, it's about the "legacy" or some other nonsense bullshit.
The King V, Rhoads, and Kelly are all Jackson originals.
5 лет назад
Jackson has a very clear and defined history behind their V shape. The first Rhoads model was clearly unique and nothing like the Gibson V. It was further changed because Randy did not like how hard it was to reach beyond the 15th fret and some other reasons. Later on Jackson just extended the lower horn of the "V" to make it more comfortable to play for players that wanted more mass in the body. As far as the Kelly goes the design is changed enough plus it's an old design that was introduced in the 80s. Gibson doesn't have a case on that one either.
So why can't you copy a guitar??? Phones have the same shape. Watches have the same shape. Microwaves have the same shape. But guitars have to look COMPLETELY different? That's BS.
This is definitely my opinion to an extent, if Dean or Luna were blatantly trying to sell copies yeah fine, but having a guitar that does not look identical to Gibson's model is not something i think you should be able to sue over. Plus using a word for the name of your product is infringement?! That seems insane to me.. Your watch analogy is especially correct...
i think gibson needs to worry about two things before getting all sue-happy: 1. make instruments are actually of heirloom quality, not something that was neutered by the boardroom and leans entirely on the reputation of its past 2. make those guitars we just talked about something that musicians are desperate to buy and others that cannot buy them extremely envious of because they are just that good
@@NeglectedField maybe I just got lucky, but I've had a Dean Baby V for 12 years that hasn't had any issues, and it's gone overseas through ship, been in storage in a humid place for extensive periods of time (with radical changes in temperature), and have been thrashed around a bunch. (I realise now this may make me sound like a deplorable person that mistreats guitars, but with all the others I have I've been keeping better tabs on... Simply forgot about the Dean in a shed haha)
@@jasonb.9790 Perhaps my mate got a dud. Still, I haven't heard of Dean having a good rep on the quality front as many of their peers e.g. Schecter, ESP/LTD, Washburn, etc. But that's just me. I still fully agree with the sentiment that Gibson should take a look at themselves before lashing out at other companies.
This is Gibson openly admitting what a lot of people already suspected: not only are they unable to compete (in quality and value) with newer manufacturers, but they're not even particularly interested in doing so.
Then why the « newer manufacturers » can’t make their own design? probably because they know it will suck... it’s so much easier to take advantage of other’s work...
this issue could be the final nail in gibson's coffin! And I love how butt hurt gibson fans are defending , unsuccessfully though, but still defending lofl!
I love Gibson guitars. IMO the Les Paul is a beautiful instrument. That being said. Gibson are making themselves look like full fledged "DoucheRockets". This crap they pulling, has this Gibson lover considering a purchase of a "Burney, Tokai, Edwards, or a Orville". I find it hard to give my hard earned cash, to non-deserving "AssClowns". No matter the product.
Yes guys I also think the LP is a beautiful beautiful shape for an instrument, no doubt! But lately I have moved on to SSs like ibanez and jackson, and I kinda like their feel, sound and playability!
Literally every guitar shape, headstock, and any other thing that Gibson is suing Dean for, have been used in many other guitars for years. Gibson must have wanted to make some quick money because their stock is super low.
lol just when Gibson gets back on the good side with the guitar community, the past week definitely has undone a lot of it. as long as they get on that inconsistent quality control, i think they'll be fine in the long run.
Sean Zetterlund Yeah I think a lot of people are forgetting the insanely short attention span of the mass public these days too. “Scandals” that happened less than a year ago feel lightyears away and are almost all but forgotten.
Headstocks - No. V body - Maybe, but doubtful. Explorer body - Maybe, but doubtful. SG body - No. Moderne - No. Hummingbird - Maybe, but just the name if at all. ES body - Maybe, but doubtful.
For me, what irks me begins with the mass of opinion that says Gibson makes shite guitars these days which are way over-priced. But rather than correct this [outrageous situation from a company with such a legacy that requires protecting through performance] they choose to spend their money trying to destroy companies that produce good quality instruments. My personal statement to Mark Agnesi [apart from you should have stayed with Norm, a man of integrity, rather than shoot for the money] is simple - you protect your legacy by living up to it. That takes dedication to quality, not dedication to destroying those who expose your lack of artistic backbone and integrity.
@@squidwardstesticles5914 true. i used to be personal friends with dean zelinsky and he told me that he put a V on top of an explorer and covered the middle up with a towel. he wanted to get an idea of what it would look like before he started cutting up wood.
Def makes me not wanna buy anymore Gibson’s although I weren’t anyway because other brands make a better product in terms of value for your money. Publicity for Dean- definitely. But I love ESP’s Gibson needs to relax and realize they don’t make affordable guitars and other companies cater to different players- especially for the money tiers
A friend of mine has a Gibson SG that cost £900 & won't stay in tune. He asked what he should do to fix it. I said buy a Telecaster! (I should have added '& sue Gibson for selling a faulty product')
"Armadillo says in the suit that Carlino Guitars, a store based in Medford, Massachusetts, allegedly received cease and desist letters from *Gibson* in April and May 2019 that demanded the removal of Dean V and Z model guitars from its website. Additionally, the letters accused the shop of being party to trademark infringement by selling Dean guitars, and threatened legal action should it not comply". So now Gibson are threatening guitar dealers as well. Thankyou Gibson, thankyou. Bankrupt the whole industry that hide the fact that your guitars are not nor have ever been "authentic". I can now see that Gibson do not care a jot about guitars at all just the dollar. So I will never buy a Gibson.
The funny thing is that Dean guitars are relatively more affordable, but that much better quality,even the Floyd Rose (which in most guitars will be Licensed) I'd rate as highly as the real deal. I don't know how they do it but my dime razorback (from 2005) is fuckin wonderful
@@MrAdravix yes dean guitars in general are very good quality and the prices are fair ( talking mainly Korean models ) every Dean guitar ( even the chinese stuff ) I've played sounded amazing and really shows that Dean guitars is a company that makes great products to suit all budgets but Gibson / epiphone when you look at certain budget/s they don't offer the best value for money much
Nah, gibson is completely out of touch, as always. This is a bad look for gibson and if they go after dean, they should go after literally everyone else who's done anything remotely similar.
About a year and a half ago I bought a Martin D-28. I was really shooting for a Collings dreadnought but just couldn't stretch it. I compared both in store and I still dream about owning that Collings lol. There's no shame in the quality of my Martin, but the Collings was clearly a step up which for a lot of people is hard to imagine. I didn't get a chance to play their electric but I can only imagine the quality put into those.
I think Gibson has the right to sue. Whether they win or not I really don't care. I have owned and played a lot of the LP style knock-offs and still haven't found one that sounds and plays like a real LP.....except a real LP. This really just makes me appreciate Fender more for not ripping off Gibson like most other companies. Maybe a better idea would have been if Gibson and Fender both got together with Trump and made it illegal or put a big tariff on guitars that resemble Fender and Gibson. We could enjoy a much lower priced quality made in the USA guitars that way.
You really think that they would LOWER the prices without competition? And todays market is global, if they put tarrifs on forregin guitars, other nations would do the same to gibson and fender, making them even more expensive outside of US. Their international sales would drop violently.
Gibson should work on making their guitars more affordable and stop making so many confusing models. I play Fenders and Gibson's because I like them. Whatever guitars work for you. This is just embarrassing for Gibson.
Gibsons failure to defend it's intellectual property for 40 years will sink this ship before it gets off the ground. Same thing happened to fender so the precedent is already set. Easy decision for any judge. BAD MOVE!! I love Gibson too and this sucks for their image. Just when we were coming back. WTF. Edit. This is going to sell more Dean guitars than has ever been sold before.
HB has a single cut body, but it's quite different in shape, it's not nearly as close in shape as some others in the past have been, and their headstocks are not even close to Gibsons. So they can get away with it. But might as well sue them, Seems Gibson like spending money on Lawyers suing everyone rather than putting that time, money and effort into fixing their own products
People going off the deep end about a company protecting its copyrights. If I were to copy a song, but just change a note or two and a word or two does that mean its not a copy? If I copy a book and just change the word "an" for "and" does that make it different? Gibson might be the worst company in the world, but they still have the right to protect themselves. They may not have innovated anything in years, but copying their copyrights and just change a measurement or two is not very innovative either. Reply
I don't think Gibson has much of a case here at all. Even in the instances you cite where they might have a case, the fact is that while Dean or Luna might have only been making these instruments for a little while, there are other companies out there that have been doing it for decades. And while what other companies do might not be a defense for Dean, the fact that Gibson is singling them out is. However, even if I thought GIbson had a decent case, they have already lost in the court of public opinion. Just as they were staring to turn around their public image, this is making them out as the villain. This is a terrible fail for them.
juggalohunter100 I disagree. Fender has a huge portion of its marketing focused solely on attracting young players. A couple minutes scrolling their website or social media feeds will show that they want to attract the new generations.
Fender has never had a court case for Trademark infringement on the Stratocaster body. They don't have a trademark on it. Fender was denied trademark on the strat body because, by the time they tried to get one, there were too many different makers making copies. Also, Gibson won the case against PRS. It was later overturned but they won it. They obviously think that maybe they can win without being overturned this time.
@@TheScottJeter "In the court case, Fender had targeted the designs of Stuart Spector Designs, US Music Corporation, ESP Guitars, Sadowsky Guitars, Lakland Musical Instruments, Peavey Electronics, Warmoth Guitar Products, Schecter Guitar Research, Michael Tobias and others as infringing its designs."
So then Dean should make their guitars without stealing Gibson's look and design. See how loyal their fans are then. But they won't - because they know their survival depends on providing fake Gibsons for people who lust after the real thing but can't afford it. If Deans are really so great, why don't they come up with their own look? And any company has the absolute right and responsibility to protect their copyrights and the years of work that have gone into their development. They owe it to the people who built those machines in the first place.
@@GearReview23 Honestly, no, but that's beside the point. Dean isn't being sued over all their guitars - just the ones that rip off Gibson, and those must be pretty damned important to Dean or they wouldn't risk the legal damages.
@@alexacojo I stated that badly. Didn't mean to suggest Dean was attempting to fool anyone, just that they were exploiting a general love of Gibson design by providing pseudo-Gibsons
Played a friend's 80s set neck ibanez explorer(1 or 2?) back in the day...excellent guitar, but the neck was wider and thinner than my les paul and sg, so it felt a little awkward...STILL pissed I didn't buy it off him tho...wise choice for YOU
