Wow...

[Strat Avenger]

 

[Verne Bunsen]

I’m not sure how I feel about that. I mean, to be fair, non-Fender guitars of that shape are typically referred to as “S-Style”, and that shape is only generic and ubiquitous because of the popularity and success of the Strat. So I get where Fender is coming from. But this definitely seems like a bit of legal tee-crossing that should have been done many decades ago. The genie is kind of out of the bottle. Whatever may be right or wrong, I suspect this ruling won’t hold up to much pressure.

 

[Spud]

Maybe in the future to manufacture S tyles will require a licensing fee be paid to the mighty F!

 

[mayfly]

just as long as it does not affect Telecasters, I'm good.

 

[Don O]

I watched that earlier today. I wonder what was trademarked? Body shape only? Does it include pickup layout (and variations)? Etc…

I read they only won the lawsuit because the other side did not show up. Hmmm…

 

[TBurst Std]

Isn’t statute of limitations in play? The F has allowed obvious Ss other than licensed for what now, 40-50 years ?

First electric I played was a Crestwood S type back in the late 70s. The body and neck were pretty much spot on. Actually it was not bad playing or sounding. Was a neighbors. Tried it against a late 70s Strat back then and I preferred the Crestwood. Eventually my neighbor wanted it back. At that time I had my 1st LP. I knew I also wanted Fender tones. Grabbed a used 69 Tele that had been Bigsby snakebit and undone. Got it for $200. Excellent Tele. I’d still have it if it wasn’t stolen in the early 80s. It was a pale blonde, white guard, maple neck with the threaded saddles.

 

[Hodgo]

Isn’t statute of limitations in play? The F has allowed obvious Ss other than licensed for what now, 40-50 years ?

That’s what the video talks about. This particular German court appears to disagree with the US interpretation Fender received in 2004

 

[Hodgo]

Which means our dealers friends at Warmoth are likely okay

 

[JohnnyHardtail]

I wonder if the copyright still applies to guitars fitted with humbuckers, or S-styles that do not have a pickguard.

From watching the video, this ruling maybe only for EU.

 

[Tretgeraet]

My first guitar was a relatively cheap strat copy, I talked about it here. I got it in 1995 and back then I was convinced that it's a generic shape for an electric guitar, because I had already seen so many different brand names on guitars that looked like that in the various mail order catalogs of the time.

They were all somewhere in the price range of 300DM - 360DM, some were black, others red and most of them in sunburst and I remember brand names like "Hohner" and "Samick"... and apart from the colors they all looked the same to me!

It was much much later, that I first heard the names Fender or Strat/Stratocaster.

So, the ruling doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[stratamania]

My first guitar was a relatively cheap strat copy,

And whether at that time you personally had heard of its original designers or not it was a copy.

It was much much later, that I first heard the names Fender or Strat/Stratocaster.

And whether you had heard of the names and knew they were the originators of the name and design does not change the facts of the matter.

So, the ruling doesn't make much sense to me.

The ruling makes perfect sense. In a lot of ways more so than earlier rulings outside of the EU.

 

[Tretgeraet]

The ruling makes perfect sense. In a lot of ways more so than earlier rulings outside of the EU.

Then: Why now? If it makes sense now, it must have made sense 30 years ago, doesn't it?

 

[Strat Avenger]

I understand Trademark; Fender Trademarked their headstock shape, but how do you "copyright" a body shape?? And when did Fender do that?

 

[NedRyerson]

Just like a song: upon first publication, as it's being treated as a "work of art." For those of us who are tired of listening to people blather on in videos and would many to read (I really hate being directed to videos when I'm trying to understand something that doesn't require visual or auditory cues as most video producers are terrible speakers):

FENDER Secures Legal Ruling To Protect Stratocaster Guitar Body Design

Fender Musical Instruments Corporation (FMIC) has secured a significant legal victory following a ruling by the Regional Court of Düsseldorf that establishes broad legal protection for Fender's iconic Stratocaster guitar body design under German and European copyright law. The decision creates...

blabbermouth.net

I wonder if the copyright still applies to guitars fitted with humbuckers, or S-styles that do not have a pickguard.

It can be litigated. Configurations like that would be judged on the basis of what the average, reasonable person would interpret, not guitar nerds who want to "well actually" the process.

"Hey, is that a copy of the 'Mona Lisa'?"
"Well actually no. You'll note that her dress is a different shade of grey, which makes it a Completely Unrelated Painting."

Or Vanilla Ice's attempt to say that the bass in "Ice Ice Baby" has a different "ding dee dee ding" than "Under Pressure," convincing absolutely nobody.

 

[supertruper1988]

We have to remember that German and EU law is different than the US. The US trademark courts decided that the Strat, Tele and P-Bass are "generic" in the 2004 ruling.

In the US trademark takes *active* defense to control the trademark, see the Monster Cable fiasco where anything music related being advertised as "monster" as a descriptor was being sued by Monster Cable because they have to actively defend the Monster™ name.

Fender didnt do that for any body shapes and tried to retroactively trademark them in the early 2000s. Warmoth, Tom Anderson, John Suhr, and a bunch of others who are making parts for these counter sued and won on the basis of a lack of defense on the part of Fender for decades.

Also trademarks are different from trade-dress which is different from a copyright which is different from a patent. All are defended and used in different ways.

The lawsuits in the 70s against Ibanez and others making copies of Strats/Teles/LPs determined that the headstock is part of a trademark but that it must be distinguished from a certain distance. However, you cannot trademark the function of a 6 inline headstock only the non functional bottom half.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice just a layman's understanding of how trademark law is partially handled in the US.

 

[italoop]

More nonsense in a LOT of nonsense happening at this moment on the planet!

Two points come to my mind:
-I wonder how much good Gibson ever had from that silly fight against PRS for a similar reason, a few years back.
-Companies like Warmoth (and several others) should not have any problems because they are licensed by big F to build a Strat body.

Truth? Fender has a terrific "platform" in their hands, the Stratocaster AND the Telecaster. Instead of wasting time and resources in these stOOpid legal things, they should and definitely could invest time and R&D is widening their offer with more woods choices, pickups choices, building details choices (fretboard radius for instance) and stuff that would make them a much better product builder.
I just can't imagine in any dream to pay 10k or 15k for a 7.5" radius Strat resembling an old one from whatever madness you want to call it (custom shop). They could do much better at lower prices and provide NEW things, along with the same old beaten stuff....