Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Tele Home Depot' started by BeeTL, May 13, 2009.
I actually really like that design. Maybe I'll be the first guy to copy your design illegally
I'd be flattered.
My attorney, not so much.
So, what would happen if Caliber wanted to protect their T-styles?
Will you send them a letter, even though they were using this shape before you thought of it?
Is that ethical? Is it passing off?
Can you stop them selling their guitars in America?
Does this company have the right to send you a C&D letter?
Is this like a trademark version of Submarine Patent farming?
Well now, how about that headstock?
All these guys seem to know what they're talking about so I'll be covered.
As the Hungarian saying goes: "there is no such thing that isn't a beer opener!"
So, I'm not an attorney, but the key concept as I understand it is creating confusion for the consumer.
I wouldn't pursue Calibre or Ruokangas, nor would I expect them to pursue me, because the combination of the "mark" and the name/logo makes it perfectly clear who is making eache of these guitars.
I read somewhere, maybe "the shape of things" article linked earlier, that there are two builders in the USA whose headstocks are so similar that a release was needed from one before the other proceeded with the USPTO.
So, my goal after learning a design patent was off the table was to ensure I had done everything I could to:
1. NOT infringe on a trademarked design.
2. Ensure that I had done my due diligence in protecting the future value of my own design and company.
Okay, now I'm confused. You trademarked the shape, but other companies are using that shape? And there's no conflict?
I've no idea what's going on at this stage. Best wishes with your endevours.
I like different guitars and I think your designs fall into that category. I like it. I probably wouldn't buy it or even want to copy it, but that's just me. If the $2000 investment makes you happy, that's great. Heck, those of us who are seriously into this " hobby", spend tons of money on stuff. It's only money and if keeps you thinking positively and motivates you, it is money well spent. What's more important I think ,is that the world is flooded with copies of plain vanilla teles and strats, and I think it's admirable that you want to try to develop your own unique style. Of all the people that I personally have known in 3 decades of custom building, that are still in business, are the ones who ventured into "new" territory, or at least didn't try to make a carbon copy of everybody else. Pick up a copy of Guitar World from the 80's and see how many of those small and independent copy builders who were advertisers are still around.
Good luck with your venture!
I should also add that I've made my share of copies but derive the most satisfaction from doing things that are unique .
So ........... help me to understand this. You copied the headstock design from an existing guitar manufacturer and applied and received a trademark for that design. Hmmmm ............. that's very creative ....... in a non-creative sort of way.
is there a specific name for that green color??
+1 - I think it's important that, after people have figured out building guitars to the point they want, people are making the unique and innovative design changes that keep them happy with the art of instrument making. I cringe to think of someone planning out what and how they will do this stuff with the objective of winning a popularity contest when the real art of making something like a guitar is often in the stuff that hardly anyone notices. I have views of the intellectual property process, it's a small part of what I do at my day job, I personally try to avoid it outside of the corporate environment, and I have enough experience with it to know that there are a lot of aspects to it - too many for a bunch of guitar builders to have a meaningful discussion and come up with a really informed view of it since it has changed significantly recently both in practice and in form.
I wish you the best with this too!
And I'll add this:
One can make a great copy of a strat, tele, LP, Gretsch, Ric or whatever, using the original molds or hand planes, or patterns, and that is great and interesting to all of us, but I think what people will remember 50 years from now aren't the copies, no matter how great they are and how close they are, but guitars that are original designs that one can come up with.
No matter how hard one wishes or tries to justify it in their mind, that copy isn't going to be a Fender, Gibson, Ric, or Gretsch.
My design is not a copy of anyone else's...period.
The likelihood that I will need to defend it against forgers is close to zero...period.
Because I have taken steps to differentiate my design from those who regularly pursue smaller bulders (F, G, R, MM), the likelihood that I will need to defend my design as infringing against theirs is close to zero...period.
Finally, because I documented the process and history here and elsewhere, I'm hoping that at least a few people learned some things...period.
For those who feel I'm stupid, my design is ugly, or that I'm doomed to failure, I really don't know what to say.
I've tried to be clear, direct, responsive and sincere.
It feels to me that some of you hate the whole IDEA that I've followed through on the process I started three years ago.
To me, that's not the friendly spirit I felt I encountered when I joined this forum, and frankly, I'm disappointed.
Oh well, I'm sure it won't be the last time a few strangers on the internet let me down.
If you ask people for their opinions, they'll tell you. On the internet, they'll also tell you when you don't ask.
The direction this thread has taken doesn't surprise me in the least. As soon as you posted your designs, you had to know people were going to comment on their merits. I would think a vendor would cherish some feedback, even though he didn't expressly ask for it. As far as the "friendly spirit" you're missing... I don't see any unfriendliness from anyone, just some honesty.
As for the "FYI" intent of this thread... I think we met that intent at Post #63. Congrats on your patent; much success with your business.
As a side note, the bass headstock design is still pending with the USPTO, and it's the one I expect to gain more traction with:
It's a Trademark, and of course, you're right.
It's just I'm disappointed that I didn't get a more positive vibe from a few folks whose work I admire.
I think this place is a microcosm of the guitar world and you will hear both pro and con comments from people checking out your work when it is out there for the world to see. You've been around here long enough to know the "personalities" behind the screen names . Some people love everything, some dislike everything, and then there are people who love some things and dislike some things. That pretty much covers all of us. Imagine how the guys who designed the Corvair, Edsel, Flying V, and Explorer felt?
A trademark; my mistake. If nothing else, your thread has helped me understand that there are different kinds of patents, but I'm still working on how that differs from a trademark (as you see!)
OK ......... so you didn't copy the Caliber headstock. My apologies.
I wouldn't want either one on my guitar but maybe that's just me. I've been very critical of headstock designs by many well know guitar makers. Sorry if you have a hard time with a little honest criticism. If you read through the posts in this thread you'll find others who have similar feeling to mine although they may be a little more subtle with their remarks. I'm afraid you may find the marketplace to be a cruel critic.