Appeasl Court Overturns Gibson vs. PRS ruling

[jwhitcomb3]

Dunno why, but PRS don't visually appeal to me at all. The few I've played left me flat too.

On the other hand, I have a real, deep seeded desire to like Gibsons...I've thought they were the coolest looking guitars since I was a kid. When I was 14 I wanted a Les Paul in the worst way. The trouble is that I've never played one that I've bonded with. I've probably picked up 100 over the years and none have come even close to tempting me.

On the other hand, it is rare that I come across a USA Hamer that doesn't have my hand twitching toward my wallet. I need to cut my guitar collection in half in the next year. I've got a great USA Tele I've owned for 18 years that I'm willing to part with, as well as a G&L and a couple of Danelectros. But I'm having a helluva time figuring out which of my Hamers to let go. I keep waiting for the honeymoon to end, but even my oldest Hamer (Archtop GT I bought 5 years ago) continues to please me every time I pick it up.

Whatever works for you!

-Jonathan

[Hamer95USA]

Hey guitarheads,

I think it's the ultimate slap in Gibson's face that the court ruled in favor of Paul Reed Smith. What do they plan to do now, sue every competing guitar builder for building a Gibson styled Les Paul, Explorer, Flying V, SG, Les Paul Junior, ES-335 guitars because the competitors build them better than Gibson? Didn't Gibson try to sue Heritage Guitars awhile back and lost? What if Hamer USA got sued for their Gibson styled guitars? I believe Gibson USA uses litigation as a way of impeding their rival guitar manufacturers from succeeding. All of the former Gibson guitar dealers don't want to give away their livelihood to be Gibson's sale slaves so they sue competing guitar builders. Way to go, Henry!!! That's some real knucklehead marketing that the guitar buying public will love. Henry, your company needs to go back to basics and learn how to build quality guitars first.

Guitar George

[mesadude]

After reading the conclusion, I understand the court's point of view on the subject of trademark shape & trade dress infringement, confusion, etc., at least in this instance.

Interesting...

For what it's worth, I've always liked, and still like Gibson guitars. I have 4. I've never really liked the PRS designs, so I have none.

Mesadude

[KorinaHound]

What do they plan to do now, sue every competing guitar builder for building a Gibson styled Les Paul...

For whatever such plans they had, this is one bigass step backwards.

Smokey Bar Theory. Tell the truth, if you knew what day they were going to argue that, wouldn't you have made a roadtrip to the trial, just to sit in there and cough "Bullshit" into your hand...!?

KorinaHound

[Abaco]

You know, just today I got my hands on a couple new Hamer Monacos - one Elite and one with chambers. I looked for a long time for a good, new Les Paul and finally gave up. But, the thought that occured to me as I really gave the Elite a good inspection was, "Why are the Gibsons so damn crappy compared to this?" The Monaco was tight. Really nice guitars. The Elite really grabbed me...if I had the cash.....

The Les Pauls I've tried out have mostly been a joke. A couple good ones but most with terrible flaws - structural and cosmetic. Twisted necks, loose parts...on and on. The Monaco Elite I looked at kicked Gibson's ass.

[Scooter]

This is a great ruling, but I can't help wondering where the "line" will eventually be drawn? How close to Gibson's (or any other guitar maker's) designs will competitors get? Will there be open season on headstock shapes?

Just wondering.

[Hamerica]

Has there been any indication of if Gibson is going to persue a higher court? Or, is it done?

Paults that is a great question.

I am of a personal view, it is highly unlikely they will ever make it to the highest court in the land. I believe they referred a recent case back to the lower court due to the nature of the process.

The same appeals court could very well hear another appeal since their was a dissenting opionion on part of the ruling, i.e. Gibson could modify the complaint to be heard again. However, the language used by the court basically told Gibson not to test the courts patientice.

However, the appeals court clearly indicated that the lower court was confused (I believe that the Gibson attorneys left if murky on purpose) on trade mark vs trade dress. I have some experience on this in the franchising business.

It really depends on how much Henry J. wants to pursue this. I am sure that Henrys' patent attorneys are working on this as we speak. They will not make the same mistake twice.

As far as justice goes, she is blind. I have been on the receiving end too many times to know that just because your right and or your cause is just, you may not receive justice. She is fickle.

Some one else asked about the Ibanez Lawsuit. Ibanez stopped since they were clearly indicating they were copies of exact tradedress and trademarks in their sales process as the court noted in the Fritch cases.

Ibanez even discusses it in their book.

Disclaimer - Hamerica is not an attorney or legal counsel. If Hamerica was, he would be making more money and buy more Hamers*. Hamerica does not own any controlling interests in any corporation, subsidiary, or other entity that may or may not have facts or knowledge about these events other than those expressed by the courts in their published ruling and those venues where public domain is inherent.

*Hamer content fulfilled.

[MrGuitarguy]

My Sony DVD player looks like a Yamaha DVD player from the sofa...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

[tomteriffic]

Has there been any indication of if Gibson is going to persue a higher court? Or, is it done?

Reading the decision, it looks to be a pretty heavy slap, Paul. I'm not sure that there's much room for appeal unless Henry's lawyers get even more weasel-y, and that's a scary thought....