Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

"Lawsuit" and Gibson

16 Posts
9 Users
0 Likes
3,038 Views
(@the-dali)
Noble Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 1409
Topic starter  

Funny... as I learn more and more about guitars, the more I begin to understand how Gibson has been a backwards company for years and years.

I recently read a book about the history of Gibson and how they actually "fell into" the Les Paul design. As the story goes, Les Paul built his prototype for Epiphone, but it ended up with Gibson. Not central to my post, but just interesting.

Anyway... I have been reviewing some information about the "Lawsuit" stuff between Gibson and the offshore manufacturers in the 1970's... and then another lawsuit earlier with PRS. Does anyone have more information about this...?

I'm not sure about the grounds for these lawsuits and it interests me. Funny how I haven't seen anything about "lawsuit" acoustic guitars, even though every company makes acoustics that look identical to one another. In addition, I haven't seen any Fender Strat/Tele lawsuit information (and the strat is probably the most copied electric guitar in the world). I imagine it has something to do with Gibson patenting their designs?

Your thoughts, information, links, or general opinions would be appreciated! Thanks!

-=- Steve

"If the moon were made of ribs, would you eat it?"


   
Quote
(@greybeard)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 21 years ago
Posts: 5840
 

As far as I know, the 70's Gibson lawsuit specified copies of the headstock design, nothing else. Most of the ebay auctions, that state "lawsuit" guitar are rubbish. There were only a couple of suits issued, I believe, and, when they were settled, everyone else followed suit.
The latest one, with PRS, was a bit of a disaster for Gibson. They claimed that the PRS single cut was too much like the LP, so that customers would get confused. In court, however, one of the Gibbo bigwigs had to admit that, if you could afford a Gibson or PRS, you were not likely to be a beginner and would have no problem differentiating between the two. Case over.

I'm not sure why there aren't Fender lawsuits, they do have protected designs (G&L have licences to copy these designs, which is one of the reasons I know that Fender has something to protect - Warmoth also licences Fender necks/headstocks). Maybe they're just more enlightened to the fact that the buying public knows a Fender as against a Stagg or Coxx or whatever and are confident enough of their image not to let it bother them.

I started with nothing - and I've still got most of it left.
Did you know that the word "gullible" is not in any dictionary?
Greybeard's Pages
My Articles & Reviews on GN


   
ReplyQuote
(@slejhamer)
Famed Member
Joined: 19 years ago
Posts: 3221
 

Found this, confirming what what Greybeard said about the headstock:
On June 28, 1977, Norlin, the parent company of Gibson, filed a lawsuit against Elger (Ibanez) in Philadelphia Federal District Court . The case was "Gibson Vs. Elger Co." with Gibson claiming trademark infringement based on the duplicate "open book" or "moustache" headstock design of the Ibanez copies. Allegedly Gibson had threatened to sue Elger/Ibanez for a long time regarding the use of the headstock which Norlin claimed as a Gibson trademark. Ironically, by the fall of 1976 Ibanez had redesigned their headstocks to look much like those found Guild guitars. The new headstock design even appeared in the 1976 catalog! So, conspiracy theorists, by the time the lawsuit was actually filed, the headstocks had already been changed. While "lawsuit" head generally means a Gibson copy headstock, the Ibanez headstock at the time of the lawsuit was actually a copy of a Guild headstock. It is an urban legend that the Gibson/Norlin lawsuit was filed against a number of Japanese companies. It is also commonly held it was over the exact copying of American designs. Neither of these urban legends are true.

EDIT:
P.S. There is no such thing as a "lawsuit guitar." There are pre-lawsuit and post-lawsuit guitars, but there is no specific guitar that brought about the lawsuit. Just general use of the trademark headstock. (I know, when you think "Gibson", the first thing that comes to mind is, "man, those guys have the best headstocks!")

"Everybody got to elevate from the norm."


   
ReplyQuote
(@off-he-goes)
Noble Member
Joined: 20 years ago
Posts: 1259
 

I agree with Greybeard, that the Singlecut lawsuit was pretty bad for Gibson. They got a lot of flack for that move, and with there drastic drop in quality control, thats the last thing they needed.

Vacate is the word...Vengance has no place on me or her...Cannot find a comfort in this world.


   
ReplyQuote
(@ricochet)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 21 years ago
Posts: 7833
 

Les Paul's prototype solid guitar, "The Log," was shown to Gibson as well as Epiphone. Les Paul had little or nothing to do with the design of the Gibson guitar that was named the "Les Paul." He signed as a celebrity endorser.

That PRS Singlecut suit caused a redesign of all the Agile guitars that looked like Gibsons. My AS-820 is one of the early ones released after the redesign. Formerly a close copy of the ES 335, it had the headstock reshaped and the "horns" on the body shortened. Similar changes were made to the ones that resembled LPs and SGs.

"A cheerful heart is good medicine."


   
ReplyQuote
(@off-he-goes)
Noble Member
Joined: 20 years ago
Posts: 1259
 

I often wondered about Tokai guitars. I see them on eBay all the time, and they are very close to Gibsons in apperance. Sometimes one will come up on there with "Lawsuit" in the title, usually with the LoveRock line, which are the Les Paul copies. Any truth to the the lawsuit thing, or is it just a scam to get people to buy the Tokais?

Vacate is the word...Vengance has no place on me or her...Cannot find a comfort in this world.


   
ReplyQuote
(@ricochet)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 21 years ago
Posts: 7833
 

I think those are the same guitars Rondo sells as Agiles. The Gibbie lookalike Agiles got blown out at bargain prices when they changed the styling. That may be what they're doing with the Tokai branded ones as well.

"A cheerful heart is good medicine."


   
ReplyQuote
(@greybeard)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 21 years ago
Posts: 5840
 

The story goes (and how much you believe, I'll leave up to you):
Gibson sued Ibanez, not really because of the headstock, but because the quality of the Ibanez guitars was at least as good, if not better, than Gibson's (not necessarily the woods, but the attention to detail and quality control) and was taking market share. Gibson needed to find a way to get at Ibanez - hence the lawsuit (as if history was repeating itself, this was probably the reason why Gibson got into the ill-fated wrangle with PRS).
A number of other Japanese manufacturers "voluntarily" changed their headstock designs, presumably to avoid having a lawsuit from Gibson. Urban legend tars them with the same brush as Ibanez, even though there were no known threats from Gibson.
To many, this pre-1975/6 period, became the "lawsuit" period. Sellers like to use this as "quality by association" - if that's what was really behind Ibanez getting sued, then all those others, who changed their headstocks, must also have been worrying Gibson with the quality of their gear, even though, in fact, there were no other lawsuits. There are many who regard all this "lawsuit" tosh as fact and will pay a premium to have a "lawsuit" guitar, no matter who made it, just as long as the seller puts "lawsuit" in the sales blurb, that's fine.
Having said that, some of the guitars of that period, such as Tokai, do have a reputation for very good quality, irrelevant of the whole lawsuit thing. One Japanese guitar that never changed it's headstock, though, was the Orville, but that was Gibson's own Japanese brand name (it was the middle name of one of the original Gibson family).

I started with nothing - and I've still got most of it left.
Did you know that the word "gullible" is not in any dictionary?
Greybeard's Pages
My Articles & Reviews on GN


   
ReplyQuote
 xg5a
(@xg5a)
Honorable Member
Joined: 19 years ago
Posts: 482
 

Just a question that's sorta off topic, but still deals witht he design copyrights thing:
Dali Lama, how does that work with G&L being able to cope Fender designs?


   
ReplyQuote
(@off-he-goes)
Noble Member
Joined: 20 years ago
Posts: 1259
 

^I'm willing to bet it has something to do with G&L being a company that was owned by Leo Fender, and Fender was also originally his.

Vacate is the word...Vengance has no place on me or her...Cannot find a comfort in this world.


   
ReplyQuote
(@pearlthekat)
Noble Member
Joined: 19 years ago
Posts: 1468
 

before the lawsuit ended with PRS, PRS had to stop selling their "look-alike" guitars, but now they're back to selling then. gibson lost the lawsuit. you can find out more on the PRS site.


   
ReplyQuote
(@the-dali)
Noble Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 1409
Topic starter  

Well, I think the G&L product actually looks diferent than other strat rip-offs out there. They have a different headstock and the tremolo is pretty different. Some of the strat copies out there have the vintage bridge that looks just like a Fender.

Anyway, I'm not sure how Fender handles that...

Weird that PRS would be targeted by Gibson... wonder if that has anything to do with McCarty?

-=- Steve

"If the moon were made of ribs, would you eat it?"


   
ReplyQuote
(@gnease)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 20 years ago
Posts: 5038
 

No matter what you call 'em, those Ibanez guitars were a great value. My first decent electric was an Ibanez copy of an SG made in '74 or '75 -- and it did indeed have the Gibson headstock and a very Gibson-like version of "Ibanez" inlaid in MOP or MOTS. Paid $100 plus my Checkmate amp for a new one. I'll have to dig up a picture.

-=tension & release=-


   
ReplyQuote
(@greybeard)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 21 years ago
Posts: 5840
 

From the homepage of G&L Guitars "Some G&L instrument models are sold under license from Fender Musical Instruments Corporation with respect to design trademarks in the Stratocaster® and Telecaster® body shapes."

I started with nothing - and I've still got most of it left.
Did you know that the word "gullible" is not in any dictionary?
Greybeard's Pages
My Articles & Reviews on GN


   
ReplyQuote
(@misanthrope)
Noble Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 2261
 

My Stagg electro-acoustic looks just like an Ovation (complete with the funky soundhole pattern), I've always wondered if one day they'll get Ovation knocking on their doors...

ChordsAndScales.co.uk - Guitar Chord/Scale Finder/Viewer


   
ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2