101–110 of 146 posts
On a side note, think how conservative music world is, if people are still manufacturing and successfully sell guitar designed in 50s. You can probably take a 50s guitar and connect to a modern amp, or take a modern guitar and connect to a 50s amp and it will work. Compare this, for example, to smartphone chargers or headphones and their compatibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
aliexpress? Thomann themselves are big in manufacturing guitars in china.
They didn't sued Thomann and they didn't show up. They sued some Chinese guy who didn't show up and used that default judgement against everyone including Thomann.
There's so many cool companies doing unique body shapes, if you're gonna take the time to build a guitar why not put some thought into the design?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Things become generic if you stop defending them/enforcing your IP. I think the iPhone at one time defended the design of its “squircle” corners. Eventually settling out of court.
I think you're thinking of trademark, but this isn't a trademark claim, it's a copyright infringement claim. The legal question is whether the guitar shape can be copyrighted.
Two legal questions they will now be asked, by Thomann or LsL, are:
- if such a copyright could exist, what shape precisely are Fender arguing it would cover?
- if such a copyright could exist, would Fender (the company) have title to it?
Answering these questions could get them into some difficulty, legally. Neither are obvious and the second one is really problematic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fender has protected the strat design under the claim of "work of applied art" ( https://spotlight.fender.com/newsroom/news/1004 ) which is also a concept in US copyright law, they just don't have a judgement for it etc. in their favour, unlike in Europe.
I can't find the details, but this needs to be under the copyright laws of the 1950s, which were very different from today. If they didn't properly register and re-register the copyright over the years the copyright is public domain. A lawyer will need to figure out these details of course. Edit: of course this case is in Germany, so US law doesn't apply and I claim not information on what their laws are.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't find the details, but this needs to be under the copyright laws of the 1950s, which were very different from today. If they didn't properly register and re-register the copyright over the years the copyright is public domain. A lawyer will need to figure out these details of course. Edit: of course this case is in Germany, so US law doesn't apply and I claim not information on what their laws are.
European copyright law has broader coverage than US law. Europe recognizes "sweat of the brow" copyright. Some databases are copyrightable in the EU even though there was no human creativity involved. The US does not do that, because the copyright clause in the Constitution limits the reach of intellectual property law. See Feist vs. Rural Telephone (phone directories not copyrightable), Bridgeman vs. Corel (copies o…
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…
For (1), not a fender style, a straight up counterfeit
But the thing is, if the counterfeit had a Fender logo and a Fender Strat style headstock, they could simply have used trademarks to deal with that — because they do have internationally recognised trademarks and the specific headstock shape is one.
They instead claimed something rather more broad and contentious that has not been tested in court in the EU but is fully at odds with 17 years of guitar industry business built on a legal finding in the USA.
A cynic would say that FMIC knew the vendor would not turn up and fight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why would the connector need to change? nothing has come out that's really better for analog signals
I do find it hilarious that the phono jack appeared fully formed and hasn't changed in a hundred years. We got the smaller flavors of TRS sure, but the big honking quarter inch phono jack has stayed exactly the same. Perfect design in one go, no notes.