Fender to Patent Tele and Strat Style Bodies

[michaelomiya]

I was lurking around, and noticed these discussions regarding Fender's attempt to impose patents on the Strat and Tele shapes. According to the "talk" (take that for what it's worth) companies replicating such shapes for profit will be req'd to pay a royalty to Fender.:mad:

Melancon Board Discussion (http://205.214.78.138/board/showthread.php?threadid=1546&perpage=15&pagenumber=1)

Check out John Suhr's post towards the end!
Huge Racks Inc Discussion (http://www.hugeracksinc.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=4223)

Again, I cease to be amazed at how greedy companies become once they become international conglomerates.

[pluto]

Michael, you beat me to it. I saw the link on the Suhr forum. All I can say is "sigghhhhhhhhhh" if the patent is approved. All the small builders are going to have to come up with a different shaped guitar which is a shame since the tele and strat shapes are so classic.

[michaelomiya]

Originally posted by pluto
Michael, you beat me to it. I saw the link on the Suhr forum. All I can say is "sigghhhhhhhhhh" if the patent is approved. All the small builders are going to have to come up with a different shaped guitar which is a shame since the tele and strat shapes are so classic.

NO lie. I am wondering if it's semantics, but the post's reference a "trademark" rather than a "patent". In my business, the two terms are synonymous. Morevover, I am making the inference that if this claim is true, that companies producing guitar bodies resembling the tele or strat shape will be req'd to pay a royalty or some licensing fee to appease the originator/inventor (fender). And whether this is true or turns out to be more internet urban legend, the fact that these kinds of legal challenges can be initiated YEARS after the fact, is indicative of the world we live in today. :mad:

[killerburst]

Substantial difference between a trademark and a patent- A trademark is something that helps a identify a product as belonging to a particular brand. The Fender headstock shape is trademarked, as is their logo and various brand identifiers. A patent is usually applied to a device or method used to achieve a particular result. The Floyd Rose tremolo system is patented. The name Floyd Rose is trademarked.

An attorney would probably shoot holes in my explanation, but I believe that's the gist of it.

[michaelomiya]

Originally posted by killerburst
Substantial difference between a trademark and a patent- A trademark is something that helps a identify a product as belonging to a particular brand. The Fender headstock shape is trademarked, as is their logo and various brand identifiers. A patent is usually applied to a device or method used to achieve a particular result. The Floyd Rose tremolo system is patented. The name Floyd Rose is trademarked.

An attorney would probably shoot holes in my explanation, but I believe that's the gist of it.

Thanks for the clarification.
But what's the financial impact of enforcing a trademark infringement versus a patent violation?

[killerburst]

Well, a patent is typically much harder and more costly to get, so the damages could potentially be much larger. Ultimately, the financial consequences would depend on what a lawyer can prove cost the patent/trademark holder in potential business, expenses in procuring and maintaining the patent/trademark, plus legal fees. If the plaintiff can prove that a competitor's infrigement cost them $1M, they could be liable for that amount.

[tom]

this is a trademark issue. you can not apply for a trademark on something you have allowed people to use for 40 years. but we still have to fight it. it is another case of the 800 lb gorilla going after the little guys.

[michaelomiya]

Originally posted by tom
this is a trademark issue. you can not apply for a trademark on something you have allowed people to use for 40 years. but we still have to fight it. it is another case of the 800 lb gorilla going after the little guys.

Excellent. FIGHT ON Tom! Let us know if there's anything that we can do to help.

[tom]

anyody got a spare few grand that they can't figure out what to do with? lawyers don't work cheap.

[JoeB63]

Originally posted by tom
anyody got a spare few grand that they can't figure out what to do with? lawyers don't work cheap.

I'll give you a few thou in exchange for some equity in TA Guitarworks.

[Dave K]

There's a similar tactic used by a certain northern California amp manufacturer with regards to patents.Circuits that have been in the public domain for 40-50+ years get patented,while the company president boldly claims how innovative they are.

If this story about Fender is true,look for a lot of negative publicity coming their way in the next few weeks.

[pcbb]

wow, this will be interesting. I didn't hear a thing about this, thanks Mike.

[pappy]

I just posted a question about this at the Fender site (www.fenderforum.com in the 'Ask Fender' subject). It'll be interested to see how the folks over there respond.

I'm really insensed at this. I'm mad at them for other reasons and this really doesn't surprise me.

Pappy

[dannopelli]

Originally posted by tom
anyody got a spare few grand that they can't figure out what to do with? lawyers don't work cheap.
I'd consider it too if it bought me a small equity stake in the event of a public offering.

[dpeterson]

gosh guys... just buy more guitars :)

dave

[michaelomiya]

Originally posted by dpeterson
gosh guys... just buy more guitars :)

dave

can't argue w/ that logic!!!:D

[dannopelli]

Originally posted by dpeterson
gosh guys... just buy more guitars :)

dave
LOL!!!

I believe most of us are doing that anyway!::p :p :p

[pappy]

They're just trying to get even with me for selling my 'Custom' Shop Custom Classic Strat in favor of a real guitar. That's all.:cool:


:D

[tom]

thank you all for the vote of confiddence. i may have a special guitar for sale to help cover legal costs.

[michaelomiya]

Originally posted by tom
thank you all for the vote of confiddence. i may have a special guitar for sale to help cover legal costs.

:cool: I'm first in line!:p

[tom]

it's probably not up your alley michael, but you never know.

[michaelomiya]

Originally posted by tom
it's probably not up your alley michael, but you never know.

sounds either very, very "vintagey" or very, very EXPENSIVE!!:D :D

[tom]

neither

[michaelomiya]

Originally posted by tom
neither

all acoustic?

[pappy]

Check out the link to my post at the Fender Forum. They've got over thirty-thousand members, I knew there had to be a lawyer over there that would comment publicly. Check out the comments towards the end.

Fender Forum Topic (http://www.fenderforum.com/forum.html?db=&topic_number=397042&lastpost=2004-02-2106:05:31)

Pappy

[dirk nixon]

In order for a guitars shape to be sucessful it needs to be original, yes, but it also needs to be famliliar. If a guitar is too different (original) no one will want to buy it because it looks weird.

A point that comes up here and there is that if Fender succeeded with its trademark plans it would force "copy cat" builders to be more innovative and come up with more original body shapes.

Well, Fender hasn't come up with any completely original body shapes in the past 40+ years either. Even Leo went back to the Strat and Tele shaped guitars with G&L.

It is amazing how Leo hit the nail on the head right out of the gate, especially with the Stratocaster. I would even go so far as to say that the Telecaster and Stratocaster were products of devine inspiration.

[Scott Peterson]

IMHO, Fender can't win. They know that going in.

But, there is always a but!, they can indeed cost everyone that makes a similar shaped guitar spend money - and we know that it is expensive - to defeat them.

And in the end, that is all Fender wants to do. They know the little guys run tight margins and even the biggie copycats like Samick are out of the country.

I see it as nothing more than an expensive red herring.

My opinion only.

[BrianH]

Who better to change the landscape of guitar shapes than Tom.
Tele and Strats are classic, but trademarkable (is there such a word?) I believe impossible.
I'm ready for a new shape, and my only concern is that it has an 'A' on the headstock.

[tom]

i'm workin' on it today. i'll cut the first proto this afternoon.

[BrianH]

i love you......and i mean it.

[dannopelli]

Such an action would be at best frivilous on Fender's part. Imitation is the greatest form of flattery!

Like most guitarists I know, I own several Strats and Teles with Fender on the headstock. People will always want a "Fender Strat or Tele" in their collection.

IMHO, companies like Anderson and Suhr that make guitars with Fender style bodies HELP a company like Fender.

Try this analogy: Not everyone can afford a Porsche. But many more might afford a Honda S200, Mazda Miata, or Toyota MR2. They GRADUATE to the Porsche. In the interim they drive the others.

Fender has its Custom Shop unit that can - if it wanted to - compete directly with Anderson or Suhr.

Such legal action will do nothing but make future Andersons cost a bit more. And I bet an extra few dollars would not sway a single Anderson buyer to switch to a high end Fender one little bit. It will not change my buying decision one friggin bit. I just got my first, a Fireburst HDT. And I have a HCS on the way.

No harm no foul. This is Fender legal being frivilous, probably to justify its existence.

UGH!:mad:

[Casper]

Dannopeli,
I noticed you are from Richmond?
Did you, by chance, buy that new Fireburst DT from Richmond Music? If so, I played that axe last week when it came in. VERY nice choice! Love the top on that one! I would like to get the Bora Blue one there.
Nice to see another Richmond player on the site..I hang out at Richmond Music quite a bit and have bought a few TAs from there myself.
L8R-
Shaun

[dannopelli]

Originally posted by Casper
Dannopeli,
I noticed you are from Richmond?
Did you, by chance, buy that new Fireburst DT from Richmond Music? If so, I played that axe last week when it came in. VERY nice choice! Love the top on that one! I would like to get the Bora Blue one there.
Nice to see another Richmond player on the site..I hang out at Richmond Music quite a bit and have bought a few TAs from there myself.
L8R-
Shaun
Hey Shaun!

Yeah I live in Midlothian, just outside of Richmond. I did get a TA Tele a while back. I loved it. But it was just not exactly what I needed at the time. So I only kept it a couple of weeks. I actually made a small profit on it! But since I never really "owned it" I kind of don't count it as ever mine. I kind of baby sat it I guess.

I did get the Fireburst. I think the top looks like a topograhy map. And it gets all kinds of great sounds.

Send me a PM. Maybe we can meet at RM one day, go to lunch with Dave. I am sure he knows you.

Danno