Thomann takes legal action against Fender • Hacker News Board

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#31

Post by dofm » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:25 PM UTC

eigenspace wrote: post #29

dofm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Fender got someone in Germany to buy a Strat type guitar from a Chinese vendor on Aliexpress and ship it to Germany (I assume this part) 2) Fender sued said small Chinese Aliexpress vendor in a regional German court for selling a "copied" design in Germany 3) The small Chinese guitar vendor didn't turn up, obviously 4) Fender got a default judgement that the S-type (Stratocaster etc.) guitar body shape (which has…

This is extra bizarre to me, because for most purposes German law doesnt operate on a system of "legal precedent" the way countries which adopted the UK model do. Am I missing something about Germany following a precedent system for patent/copyright or something, or is this even dumber than it sounds?

It's that dumb.

Sorry, I rushed through my comment and perhaps didn't make it clear.

They have a default judgement only. But they used it to demand US-based manufacturers recall European-bound inventory, destroy it and certify it destroyed.

Even though they know full well that inventory can legally be sold in the USA — which is part of the near-comical gaslighting walkback the FMIC CEO attempted the other day. They are already admitting it's not a USA thing.

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#32

Post by lompad » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:25 PM UTC

dofm wrote: post #18

worik wrote: post #15

I am confused. What is this about?

1) Fender got someone in Germany to buy a Strat type guitar from a Chinese vendor on Aliexpress and ship it to Germany (I assume this part) 2) Fender sued said small Chinese Aliexpress vendor in a regional German court for selling a "copied" design in Germany 3) The small Chinese guitar vendor didn't turn up, obviously 4) Fender got a default judgement that the S-type (Stratocaster etc.) guitar body shape (which has…

This really reads like some american lawyer used an llm and never questioned whether legal precedent is even a thing in germany aside from the highest courts.

Have seen several like this in the last months, though in much more niche areas and with barely any publicity.

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#33

Post by ben7799 » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:27 PM UTC

I play guitar, I own a Fender guitar and a Fender amp, along with another non-fender amp and 2 other non Fender guitars.

I'm just super sick of hearing about this story. Guitar players online are way too worked up about this. Fender is being annoying, but there is no way I'm getting rid of my Fender guitar or amp over this, and there is no way any of this would stop me from buying another one.

The Fender shapes just don't need to be copied at all. I live near a famous boutique type shop. They may have some boutique guitars that rip off the shapes of Fenders, it's been tolerated, but they have a lot of guitars that don't rip off Fender shapes and many of them are really great guitars.

Too many players are acting like the sky is falling if Fender wins with any of this stuff. The sky is not going to fall. We'll go back to the way things used to be where Fender body shapes weren't ripped off so often and it will be fine.

I think some of the doom and gloom is also because too many players are super obsessed with buying more and more guitars all the time. It's all about what is the next purchase as opposed to just enjoying the guitar they have.

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#34

Post by codedokode » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:28 PM UTC

frankfrank13 wrote: post #22

codedokode wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But technically the guitar does not have to have a shape of a strat. It could be any other shape, why not be creative and make your own design?

Because strats sell. Oddly shaped guitars don't, or at least not for a long time, and would never break into the top 10 best selling guitar shapes.

To be fair there is nothing in the shape that makes it sound better than other guitars; so it is not like those modem chip makers or video codec developers that patent the only optimal way to achieve the goal and prevent anybody from competing. Fender does not prevent anyone from making a better guitar. So I do not like copying. It would be better if everyone used their own unique shape rather than something from 50s.

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#35

Post by valdiorn » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:28 PM UTC

dofm wrote: post #25

codedokode wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But technically the guitar does not have to have a shape of a strat. It could be any other shape, why not be creative and make your own design?

FMIC likely cannot even properly identify the allegedly protected shape of the Strat because they sell multiple Stratocasters that have different body shapes and proportions. They may simply not be able to say "it's this thick", even, because they sell Strats with different thicknesses. They might not be able to say "it has these body contours" because they sell flat, edge-bound Stratocasters. The list goes on. Plus,…

This is exactly the argument that the lawyer for LSL guitars is making - who happens to be the same lawyer that beat Fender back in 2009 on behalf of the USPTO and cost them the copyright in the US :)

(Absolutely baller move for LSL to hire that guy)

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#36

Post by _def » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:29 PM UTC

dofm wrote: post #18

worik wrote: post #15

I am confused. What is this about?

1) Fender got someone in Germany to buy a Strat type guitar from a Chinese vendor on Aliexpress and ship it to Germany (I assume this part) 2) Fender sued said small Chinese Aliexpress vendor in a regional German court for selling a "copied" design in Germany 3) The small Chinese guitar vendor didn't turn up, obviously 4) Fender got a default judgement that the S-type (Stratocaster etc.) guitar body shape (which has…

aliexpress? Thomann themselves are big in manufacturing guitars in china.

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#37

Post by dofm » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:30 PM UTC

codedokode wrote: post #30

dofm wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FMIC likely cannot even properly identify the allegedly protected shape of the Strat because they sell multiple Stratocasters that have different body shapes and proportions. They may simply not be able to say "it's this thick", even, because they sell Strats with different thicknesses. They might not be able to say "it has these body contours" because they sell flat, edge-bound Stratocasters. The list goes on. Plus,…

Maybe the law should protect creative part of the shape (that doesn't affect the sound)? I do not know but I think that designing a good instrument is not easy and it is not cool that someone can just copy it without doing any work.

That is effectively what Fender are claiming they now have in Europe (off the back of a case that was not even argued because the vendor didn't turn up).

One key thing here is that the Stratocaster did have a design patent attached, and when your design patent expires, that's it; none of that is protected.

But the guitar was designed in 1954 (and indeed the body shape in 1951, fundamentally, because the Fender Precision bass guitar looked like that first). So the design patent was gone by 1970.

At the time, US copyright did not apply to functional shapes, and most of the core aspects of the Strat shape are actually functional — cutaways and sculpting.

Manufacturers like Schecter were making guitars with an S body shape by 1979. So this isn't new, and it is weird.

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#38

Post by 12_throw_away » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:30 PM UTC

eigenspace wrote: post #29

dofm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Fender got someone in Germany to buy a Strat type guitar from a Chinese vendor on Aliexpress and ship it to Germany (I assume this part) 2) Fender sued said small Chinese Aliexpress vendor in a regional German court for selling a "copied" design in Germany 3) The small Chinese guitar vendor didn't turn up, obviously 4) Fender got a default judgement that the S-type (Stratocaster etc.) guitar body shape (which has…

This is extra bizarre to me, because for most purposes German law doesnt operate on a system of "legal precedent" the way countries which adopted the UK model do. Am I missing something about Germany following a precedent system for patent/copyright or something, or is this even dumber than it sounds?

As a legal theory, "this default judgement against an anonymous AliExpress seller is binding on literally everyone in the world" kinda reminds me of the Dune nft bros' "we bought a book about Dune and therefore now own the intellectual property rights to Dune."

Except this one is apparently coming from actual accredited lawyers? (Who knows, I'm not a lawyer, maybe it really does work that way and Fender is the first company to figure out how to exploit this)

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#39

Post by eigenspace » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:30 PM UTC

dofm wrote: post #31

eigenspace wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is extra bizarre to me, because for most purposes German law doesnt operate on a system of "legal precedent" the way countries which adopted the UK model do. Am I missing something about Germany following a precedent system for patent/copyright or something, or is this even dumber than it sounds?

It's that dumb. Sorry, I rushed through my comment and perhaps didn't make it clear. They have a default judgement only. But they used it to demand US-based manufacturers recall European-bound inventory, destroy it and certify it destroyed. Even though they know full well that inventory can legally be sold in the USA — which is part of the near-comical gaslighting walkback the FMIC CEO attempted the other day. They a…

Yikes. I guess we'll find out in a couple months that Fender had replaced their legal department with ChatGPT 3 or something.

Re: Thomann takes legal action against Fender

#40

Post by balfirevic » Wed, Jun 24, 2026, 8:30 PM UTC

codedokode wrote: post #30

dofm wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FMIC likely cannot even properly identify the allegedly protected shape of the Strat because they sell multiple Stratocasters that have different body shapes and proportions. They may simply not be able to say "it's this thick", even, because they sell Strats with different thicknesses. They might not be able to say "it has these body contours" because they sell flat, edge-bound Stratocasters. The list goes on. Plus,…

Maybe the law should protect creative part of the shape (that doesn't affect the sound)? I do not know but I think that designing a good instrument is not easy and it is not cool that someone can just copy it without doing any work.

> that doesn't affect the sound

That would be the whole shape.