Fender Loses Battle - Your Take, BP?

[Aussie Mark]

That is it. You have to protect your intellectual property as you go along. You can't sit back and let copies be made for decades, and then suddenly decide "I am going to protect my IP now, and I am going to shut down all you copycats." If you let copies go on and become established, you are in essence abandoning your mark.

See: John Hall and Rickenbacker. Because Rickenbacker missed the party 35 years ago and did nothing to stop the (very good) copies made in Japan at the time, all they can do these days is spend their energy hunting down and shutting eBay auctions when the 5th or 12th owner of those instruments decide to sell their bass to pay bills or put food on the table for their family. Rickenbacker's approach is arse-about and petty, purely because they were asleep at the wheel when they should have done something when these instruments were actually being made all those years ago.

 

[Russel]

Copyrights and such aside, it's laughable to imagine an entire INDUSTRY springing up in order to make a better Bongo or Stingray, isn't it?

unpossible.

 

[TNT]

Just my opinion.

The labor, efforts and costs of manufacturers MUST be protected!!! Copy cats are .. . . . . . (I don't want to say it) who mitigate these costs and immediately see profits (knowing what's hot and what's not).

The only issue I see here is the subjective nature of a copy cat, e.g., when Gibson sued PRS over the "Les Paul" style PRS guitar (and subsequently lost). How close was it?? In who's opinion?? Where is the line drawn??

Attorneys love it when these "grey" areas are concluded in the courts, and not pursuant to a foundation of principle of operations.

In conclusion, why be an innovator at all??? Just wait until one BIG company builds (at their expense) a product, then wait and see how it goes, then copy it, and put them out of business.

And, then why stop there?? Why not start copying manufacturer colors, packaging, styles, etc. . . . .

Regardless of how long Fender let it "go" doesn't make it right, no more than a criminal who commits a crime, then because it's 20 years later when he gets caught, he's not subject to any legal ramifications. Similar to the injustice of homesteading and statute of limitations.

If a certain music company wants to (in theory) make a lesser expensive product of their own product, then that's a copy I can live with!!

Just my opinion.

 

[philthygeezer]

A question: I thought patents ran out after a specified time like 21 years or so eg. Lipitor. Does this also apply to IP copyrights like the shapes/designs of guitars?

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

My guess is no. The shape is one of the major identifying factors (e.g. the Fender headstock) and as such should belong to the original manufacturer.

 

[DanTheMan]

In the current market I think 7ender should act as his founder did, be succesfull and unique with the products they design or manufacture.

...it should now focus on new products, and not keep re-inventing the wheel.

I mean; who still drives a T-Ford on a daily basis? Products evolve, and so should 7ender.

I agree with you in principle, innovation is usually a good thing but I think the musical instrument market is very different from the car market or any others. There is a large number of musicians who want the 'classic' look, feel and most importantly tone of the Fender's, Gibson's, Marshall's etc. That is why the reissue's are so popular and people are willing to pay big bucks for them. There's alot of rock 'n' roll mythology attached to certain instruments and amps and people want to be a part of that. If you're a Hendrix fan, generally speaking, you want to have a Strat and a Marshall stack. I admit I'm one of those people.
BP himself mentioned the "intolerant market" for something radically different.

But I respect what you're saying.

Great thread, thanks for posting!

 

[Big Poppa]

CHicken or the egg? I can tell you that one of the beautiful things happening is that youth will drive change. There will be a guy come bursting onto the scene...playing something different......there will be a designer that crashes onto the scene with something so cool that the players may adopt it. OK one can dream,

 

[Oldtoe]

 

[T-bone]

OK one can dream,

A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality. John Lennon

tbone

 

[TNT]

Any product at anytime is just "one" artist away from complete success!!

 

[jar546]

Build a quality instrument, provide excellent customer service and charge a reasonable price and you will be succesful no matter how many people copycat. If you are missing any of the above 3, you will be affected by copycats.

 

[Big Poppa]

How can you say that you are not affected when the copycat stays in business? SOmeone is buying his or her copy......

 

[jar546]

If you stay in business, make payrol & profit, you are successful. Some steady growth, no matter how small is still growth & puts you in the right direction.

There will always be competition and most if not all of those who go with the copycat probably could not afford the original product anyway.

All good patents come to an end anyway. You just have a head start on the competition.

 

[TheAntMan]

BP is ahead of the curve on this again!!

1) Sterling by Musicman line to compete with the copycats
2) New 25th Anniversary and Big-AL models for new design patents
3) Of course let us not forget the unique BONGO!!!
4) Plus the regular production line instruments

Yeah, EBMM is solid!

-- Ant

 

[GHWelles]

All good patents come to an end anyway. You just have a head start on the competition.

Uhhh. We are not talking about patents, but trademarks. Trademarks do not come to an end. As long as you use and protect your trademarks their lifespan is indefinite.

 

[midopa]

so what happens now for fender and cloners? is fender ip protected for fender products and clones made from this point forward? find out in the next episode of guitar wars ii: the attack of the clones

 

[RocketRalf]

it's not a matter of staying in the business and growing, it's a matter of someone else profitting from your hard work that cost you time, money and human resources to be developed. I dont think everyone should reinvent the guitar, but come on, its not that hard to imagine a different body for a 3 single coil guitar.

 

[Big Poppa]

I dont know how to respond to jar on this.....I really dont agree and believe that copies take the money out of my pocket that feed and provide a quality lifestyle for my family and the 125 other families that depend on making our products......

 

[r goldsmith]

The unauthorized/unlicensed use of another's intellectual property is just as bad as any other form of misappropriation in my view. Using someone else's efforts as a springboard to make money for yourself means you get to reap without sowing.

 

[Russel]

I dont know how to respond to jar on this.....I really dont agree and believe that copies take the money out of my pocket that feed and provide a quality lifestyle for my family and the 125 other families that depend on making our products......

I think that this is just a difference in perspective. Namely producer and consumer.

Rights and viewpoints aside, considering the unenlightened and word-of-mouth nature of this kind of market, it is not in the best interest of the consumer or the manufacturer for copies to exist, and it's a very good thing for EB to pursue protection for the company's trademarks. I'm happy my name is on one of the trademark applications for this reason.

On copies, I feel that a copy can never be better than an original, because a copy by its nature is not an innovation. An innovation, can be better in some ways and worse in others.

but as I've said before, I'm just some backwoods redneck from MS. My opinion should not and does not matter.