4+2 headstock - DNA guitars

[kimonostereo]

Just thought I'd throw this up here as I thought it was interesting to see Johnny Hiland playing another new guitar with a 4+2 headstock that ISN'T an EBMM. If I'm not mistaken, EBMM still hold the rights to 4+2 headstock.

Johnny Hiland meets his new DNA guitar! - DNA Guitar Company

More here:
DNA Guitar Company - INNOVATION TO FUEL YOUR INSPIRATION - CUSTOM GUITARS HANDCRAFTED IN THE USA

 

[threeminutesboy]

don't understand this guy singing praises about his Axis Sport SSS and then jumps on another endorsement few weeks later.

Money talks

 

[Magic Jason]

A few weeks ago, in a vidéo, he was suggesting - asking for a signature model from EBMM. Kind of guy that jumps from brand to brand? Not the "musicman endorsee" way. EVH are you reading me?

 

[dave1812]

So is he now a DNA Endorser or was it just a One Off from them? Wouldn't be surprised if he changed Company's again.
Remember, he already had a PRS Signature Guitar, that he tossed...

 

[Big Poppa]

lets not hang him yet....want to talk to him first

 

[Samoht]

BP, right as usual. Johnny has done similar with other brands since playing EBMM...but he typically says he's going to play them in the studio and I never see them again. I won't mention the brands, but the videos are out there. I think he's just a big-hearted guy who likes touting different brands from folks he likes. Of all guitars I've ever seen him play, endorsement or not, his EBMM axes are the ones he gushes the most about.

I'd LOVE to see Johnny play a Valentine. That would be amazing to hear.

 

[Magic Jason]

lets not hang him yet....want to talk to him first

Yes, sir!

 

[kestrou]

lets not hang him yet....want to talk to him first

Hang on, hang on, hang on...

You mean aim and THEN shoot?

That's not the order most people do things in!

Kevin

 

[KevTN]

I am just putting in my two cents. I don't think he is 'jumping ship' I think DNA offered to build him a guitar and he accepted. This is his qoute on the DNS website
” I want to thank Tony and Dave for building Aubry for me! Even though I am a Music Man endorser, she is the first 24 fret tele styled baby I have ever owned! She is beautiful, and she’ll be played in the studio a lot!! DNA builds a smoking hot guitar! Y’all ROCK!” – Johnny Hiland

 

[beej]

Regardless ... looks like a trademark violation.

 

[kestrou]

Regardless ... looks like a trademark violation.

+1

Kevin

 

[luiscesaripad]

What next?

 

[Flash Gordon]

If it's a one off guitar, I don't see a business case to go after them. A simple letter from legal representation informing them of the infringement and not to continue such activity would be appropriate.

 

[BrickGlass]

If it's a one off guitar, I don't see a business case to go after them. A simple letter from legal representation informing them of the infringement and not to continue such activity would be appropriate.

Almost every guitar I see from them is a 4+2 headstock. It might be a one off for Johnny, but the company clearly uses the 4+2 thing on several guitars.

 

[Rick C]

Are you guys sure about the 4+2 "violation". First, it can't be a "trademark" violation because a physical positioning of tuners is not a trademark; I think what you folks mean is a "patent" violation. I've been involved in many patent applications and can't believe that EB could make a strong case for a 4+2 arrangement. It's just a physical positioning of tuners; nothing really new or special technology wise.

Slightly off topic; have you seen the Gibson Les Paul 7 string head? Looks awful; a 3+4 on a conventional LP headstock. Just looks wrong. I'm sure Gibson didn't try to patent this!

 

[kimonostereo]

Before any speculation begins regarding EBMM's trademark of 4+2 headstock, could a forum admin lock this thread?

More info here:
http://forums.ernieball.com/ernie-ball-music-man-guitars/38870-4-2-headstock-copyright.html

 

[beej]

Rick- the headstock configuration for various EBMM instruments is trademarked in the US. You can find lots of info in the USPTO database if you're curious.

I'm not going to lock it, but yes, let's go easy on the comments.

 

[koogie2k]

May just be a one off since it is a tele body style. The headstock config may be in violation but I am no legal expert and don't have a dog in that fight.

 

[Rick C]

Thanks Beej; I'm still surprised that something as simple as a tuner arrangement stood up to patent scrutiny, especially when the shape of the head is so Fender-esque. I recently got a Majesty 6 and love it but the only thing that looks out of place from my, very subjective perspective is the headstock; it does not match the design of the body at all.

 

[BrickGlass]

koogie, I don't think it is a one off. Seems like they have several guitars that are 4+2.

Rick, I absolutely LOVE the 4+2 look. The MM headstock gives an incredibly straight string pull from the bridge all the way up. Works extremely well.