Customize/relic a tele for resale... Any copyright issues?

[tele_jas]

I have a buddy that buys Fenders and Squire tele's (new and used) and then does "his own thing" to them. He's built a few and gave them away to some good friends and sold a few. One is getting ready to be used in a video on CMT by an artist (they play on "outlaw country" on XM radio) that is getting his "big break". FYI: What he did with this one is route out the body behind the bridge and put a real, mini "Jim Beam" bottle in there (with some Whiskey left in it) and then filled it up with acrylic. He put a LED flash light behind it with the bulb shining on the "Jim Beam" bottle, and when you turn it on it lights up really nicely. The guy is a big Jim Beam fan and LOVES this guitar.

What he does is sands them down, drills holes in them and fills them in with acrylic and uses a wood burner to put "Tiki" stuff in them. He then puts his "name plate" (a dog tag) over the Fender logo.

My question is this: How much of this will get him in trouble? He's getting ready to get a website and start selling these to the public. Will the use of actual "Fenders" get him in trouble, will the covering of the "Logo" get him in trouble, will using the "Fender" neck with the "Fender Telecaster" shaped headstock get him in trouble? How far is too far?? He thinks he'll be "OK", but I want to be sure and ask around for him first.

Any input is apprecieated.

[Verne Bunsen]

I believe a copyright attorney is in your buddies future. He oughtta talk to one before one comes to talk to him, thats my advice. Especially if he's going into business. My take is that he'll probably be OK, I mean look at the aftermarket industry for cars and motorcycles. Still, I'd encourage him to seek professional legal counsel before opening for business.

Got any pics of his creations? Sounds interesting!

[Mark Davis]

He cant have a Fender logo on it at all even if its partially covered.

So as long as it doesnt say Fender anywhere he will be ok.

[Catto]

I'd say trademark law is the area of concern, not copyright - if he's in any way suggesting that these are licensed or endorsed by Fender or (more likely) Jim Beam, without a written agreement with them, he'll potentially be profiting from their trademark and land himself in a mess o' trouble.

I don't actually think he'll have as much trouble from selling a used (and adapted) Fender with the Fender logo intact - it's still an original Fender that he's selling as used, just in pretty unusual condition! The larger problem I think is making the bottle of Jim Beam his 'unique selling proposition', as that's clearly pitching it to Jim Beam fans and therefore leveraging off their brand.

As always, legal advice should come from a lawyer who knows the relevant statutes and precedents - not other musicians (or, in my case, photographers!). Even if it's not 'for profit' in his eyes, these corporations have to defend their trademarks or they'll become public domain - so he should tread carefully.
R