Judge axes PRS guitar sales

[Mudcat]

More news on the Gibson lawsuit against PRS. Looks like the PRS Single Cut is now a very good investment.

 

The article points out the fact that a bunch of guitar manufacturers lobbied the judge in favor of PRS. Once again, I'm all in favor of enforcing trademarks, but there is no way that a guitarist would ever confuse any PRS guitar with a Gibson.

******************************

Judge axes PRS guitar sales

 

By Chris Lewis, clewis@nashvillecitypaper.com

July 14, 2004

 

 

Todd Austin, manager of the electric guitar department at Corner Music in Nashville, shows off the PRS Singlecut guitars he has for sale. Photo by M.J. Masotti Jr.

A federal judge in Nashville has barred sales of a popular electric guitar model by Paul Reed Smith Guitars, although at least two stores in Nashville still offer them for sale.

 

Federal District Judge William Haynes Jr. issued an injunction on July 2 prohibiting the Maryland company from manufacturing, selling and distributing its Singlecut model.

 

The ruling came about six months after the judge ruled that PRS infringed on the trademark held by Nashville-based Gibson Guitars Corp. for its famous Les Paul single cut-away model.

 

The injunction was issued just before a trial last week in U.S. District Court to determine how much money in damages PRS will have to pay Gibson from its profits from the guitar sales. Haynes has yet to issue his decision. Meanwhile, PRS attorneys have filed notice to appeal the injunction.

 

Paul Reed Smith is and will fully comply with the court order, said William Coston, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney for PRS. Its already stopped manufacturing. Its not distributing or selling any (Singlecut) products to the dealer network.

 

The judges ruling does not address specifically how the injunction affects retailers with the guitars already in stock.

 

At least two PRS dealers in Nashville Guitar Center near 100 Oaks Mall and Corner Music have Singlecuts on display, according to store managers. They said they had not received any word from PRS about suspending sales.

 

To this day, I still havent heard any official word from PRS as far as having to pull them, said Brett Arney, manager of Guitar Center Nashville. Theyre on the wall, theyre regularly priced ($2,000 and up) and anyone who wants to buy one, as far as Im concerned, is still more than welcome to purchase one.

 

Todd Austin, manager of Corner Musics electric guitar department, said he has three of the guitars for sale, but said technically the guitars belong to him.

 

I mean when we order our guitars from PRS as a dealer, when they arrive at our store we pay for them then and they are our property, he said.

 

Gibsons Les Paul electric guitar, considered by many to be the classic of its type, has been made since 1952. PRS, which also makes a double-cutaway model guitar, introduced its Singlecut design in 2000. Both brands have cutaway areas between the neck and the lower part of the body to allow players to access the higher frets.

 

The judge in January sided with Gibson that the Singlecut infringed on its Les Paul trademark because it was so similar in its look at market appeal that it caused confusion in the minds of consumers.

 

The case has such chilling implications that several guitar manufacturers and related companies including Taylor Guitars, Peavey Electronics Corp., and J. DAddario & Co. Inc. banded together to try to argue to the judge that generally guitar buyers arent confused between PRSs and Gibsons guitars.

 

Given the widespread use of single cutaway guitar styles, the Courts decision in this case will impact the entire guitar industry, the companies attorneys stated in a friend-of-the-court brief that the judge rejected.

 

Gibsons registered trademark of a two dimensional body silhouette simply reflects a generic single cutaway style, one of the most prominent styles of guitars on the market, of which Gibsons Les Paul is simply one of the more popular models available, the brief stated.

[Darklava]

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/uploaded/0714gibson.jpg

 

Look everybody it's joe dirt

[Funk Jazz]

for the record: i have not, and never will, buy a gibson made instrument.

 

this bullshit just intensifies my resolve.

[Billster]

Originally posted by DARKLAVA:

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/uploaded/0714gibson.jpg

 

Look everybody it's joe dirt

Was that picture taken in this decade?

 

I really feel confused about the guitar he's holding. If he's holding a Gibson LP, I really have a lowered opinion of Gibson for providing him with an instrument. I hereby swear off Gibson guitars.

[Mudcat]

Originally posted by DARKLAVA:

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/uploaded/0714gibson.jpg

 

Look everybody it's joe dirt

Hey, don't mock my buddy Todd Austin (I went to college with him in the early 80s - he's actually a pretty good guy).

 

When he's not working at Corner Music, Todd plays in a band called the Disciples of Loud with Jason and the Scorchers guitarist Warner Hodges. They're actually pretty good if you are into loud and heavy.

 

FWIW - Todd is a big-time Floyd Rose bender so I don't think he ever uses PRS or Gibson guitars.

[zeronyne]

Originally posted by DARKLAVA:

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/uploaded/0714gibson.jpg

 

Look everybody it's joe dirt

Wow look at that nice Les Paul.

[Darklava]

http://www.smileytown.com/content/emot/work0004.gif

 

I ment to say he's a hansome lad.

[Mudcat]

Originally posted by DARKLAVA:

http://www.smileytown.com/content/emot/work0004.gif

 

I ment to say he's a hansome lad.

Well, even I'll admit he's a bit scruffy.

[cosmo115]

Originally posted by Mudcat:

When he's not working at Corner Music, Todd plays in a band called the Disciples of Loud with Jason and the Scorchers guitarist Warner Hodges. They're actually pretty good if you are into loud and heavy.

My worthless two cents, I listened to a couple songs on their website and IMHO the lyrics were laughable (FYI they show the lyrics while the songs are playing) and the music was mediocre, but I didn't hear any whammy usage

 

FWIW - Todd is a big-time Floyd Rose bender so I don't think he ever uses PRS or Gibson guitars.

I guess he changed a lot since college According to his bio on the website, he primarily uses PRS, but he also plays a Gibson Moderne, Gibson Explorer and Gibson Les Paul.

 

P.S. I think he should win the mullet of the century award hands down

[Mudcat]

Originally posted by cosmo115:

Originally posted by Mudcat:

When he's not working at Corner Music, Todd plays in a band called the Disciples of Loud with Jason and the Scorchers guitarist Warner Hodges. They're actually pretty good if you are into loud and heavy.

My worthless two cents, I listened to a couple songs on their website and IMHO the lyrics were laughable (FYI they show the lyrics while the songs are playing) and the music was mediocre, but I didn't hear any whammy usage

 

FWIW - Todd is a big-time Floyd Rose bender so I don't think he ever uses PRS or Gibson guitars.

I guess he changed a lot since college According to his bio on the website, he primarily uses PRS, but he also plays a Gibson Moderne, Gibson Explorer and Gibson Les Paul.

 

P.S. I think he should win the mullet of the century award hands down

His hair is kind of like a cross between Lyle Lovett and the Achy Breaky Heart guy, insn't it?

 

I completely forgot about the Moderne & the Explorer! He's had those guitars for quite awhile.

 

I'm a bit surprised at the PRS & LP? I overlooked that when I first looked at their website. Back in the 80s Todd had a wild superstrat with a custom paint job & Floyd Rose. I suspect his PRS guitars have whammy bars of some sort. I need to go back and take a look at his gear again.

 

BTW - I haven't seen Todd play in several years but I have heard his band with Warner. I'm just out of touch with what he's playng thse days I guess.

[cosmo115]

Originally posted by Mudcat:

BTW - I haven't seen Todd play in several years but I have heard his band with Warner. I'm just out of touch with what he's playng thse days I guess.[/QB]

I had no ill intentions, I just found it a little amusing. Sorry.

[Mudcat]

Originally posted by cosmo115:

Originally posted by Mudcat:

BTW - I haven't seen Todd play in several years but I have heard his band with Warner. I'm just out of touch with what he's playng thse days I guess.

I had no ill intentions, I just found it a little amusing. Sorry.[/QB]

No slight taken. Just another example of the rapidly encroaching mental fog of my middle-age.

 

BTW - Agree with you about the Disciples of Loud lyrics. The band is what it is. I actually prefer the Scorchers and the stuff Todd did years ago myself.

[Werewolf by Night]

Originally posted by FunkJazz:

"for the record: i have not, and never will, buy a gibson made instrument.

 

this bullshit just intensifies my resolve."

As much as I love a good Gibson Les Paul, I'm leaning towards like sentiments.

 

I'd gladly sign a petition/boycott against Gibson untill they retract this crap!

 

It's ridiculous and serves no real purpose, other than to hurt PRS. Besides that, it really isn't truly helping Gibson, is it? The single-cutaway guitar (in general) predates the Les Paul, and may even predate Gibson. It's like someone suing Gibson over a three-on-a-side tuner arrangement!

[Mudcat]

Originally posted by Caevan O'Shite:

Originally posted by FunkJazz:

"for the record: i have not, and never will, buy a gibson made instrument.

 

this bullshit just intensifies my resolve."

As much as I love a good Gibson Les Paul, I'm leaning towards like sentiments.

 

I'd gladly sign a petition/boycott against Gibson untill they retract this crap!

 

It's ridiculous and serves no real purpose, other than to hurt PRS. Besides that, it really isn't truly helping Gibson, is it? The single-cutaway guitar (in general) predates the Les Paul, and may even predate Gibson. It's like someone suing Gibson over a three-on-a-side tuner arrangement!

Back on topic - I'm totally perplexed by the judge's ruling considering the friend of the court brief from the other manufacturers.

 

With any luck other companies may come after Gibson on "trademark infringements" on some of their products.

[Billster]

Gibson's lawyers no doubt told them to defend their turf. That's what lawyers do. The problem is that small points get blown out of all proportion with reality. Lawyers can go on forever with things that lawyers find interesting, but do nothing to find resolution.

 

Someone in Gibson corporate needs to demonstrate some leadership and tell those guys to knock it off (no pun intended). I mean really, licensing a shape???

 

Maybe Arnold Schwarzenegger could license his physique, and charge copyright fees to all future bodybuilders.

[Cowbell]

Eh, the war isn't over yet. PRS is gonna appeal.

 

BTW, the guitar Mr. Dirt is holding is a PRS Singlecut. you can tell cause the headstock matches the body color.

[BenderOfStrings]

well the PRS seems to be the "flavor of the month" guitar right now just the way Kramers and BC Rich guitars were in the 80's.

 

If the single cutaway PRS has been out since 2000, why has it taken Gibson so long to take any legal action against them? I guess because they feel the PRS single cut is taking sales away from them. Still, other than the fact that it IS a single cut guitar, that is the only similarity between the two. There are tons of guitar makers out there who make Les Paul clones that look much much closer to an actual Les Paul than the PRS singlecut. Why don't they go after them?

[cosmo115]

Originally posted by BenderOfStrings:

There are tons of guitar makers out there who make Les Paul clones that look much much closer to an actual Les Paul than the PRS singlecut. Why don't they go after them?

PRS has more money and is obviously perceived as a bigger threat. PlUS Gibson may have gone after the other LP clone makers, but it might not have received/deserved the same media attention.

[Billster]

Originally posted by BenderOfStrings:

If the single cutaway PRS has been out since 2000, why has it taken Gibson so long to take any legal action against them?

The lawsuit was in fact filed in 2000. 4 years to get any sign of a conclusion is reasonable in the litigation world. Like I said in my previous post, lawyers can spend a lot of time on things that go nowhere towards a solution. The courts are very backlogged also.

[Funk Jazz]

Originally posted by BenderOfStrings:

well the PRS seems to be the "flavor of the month" guitar right now just the way Kramers and BC Rich guitars were in the 80's.

nope, i'm sorry but you're wrong here. they've been gaining popularity ever since 1985 when they initially offered standard model. this is far from a fad or a "flavor of the month." no offense

 

the real travesty here is how PRS is simply better at the business of building guitars than gibson. and rather than improve their own processes, gibson has given into lawsuits.

 

how do you suppose les paul feels about this? has anyone seen/heard remarks from the man?

[Billster]

Originally posted by cosmo115:

PLUS Gibson may have gone after the other LP clone makers, but it might not have received/deserved the same media attention.[/QB]

Right you are - check out the story linked in my other post.

[Billster]

Originally posted by FunkJazz:

the real travesty here is how PRS is simply better at the business of building guitars than gibson. and rather than improve their own processes, gibson has given into lawsuits.

 

how do you suppose les paul feels about this? has anyone seen/heard remarks from the man?

Iagree, they should compete in the market and not in court.

 

I don't imagine Les thinks much of this action, but I haven't seen any quotes. After the Les Paul/SG fiasco in the early 60's, he probably has little tolerance for the small minds of big business. Pure speculation on my part.

[Dennyf]

Said this before, but I can't help but wonder about the intrinsic value when an entity starts getting shrill about the superficialities.

 

This applies to a lot more than guitars and guitar builders.

[JimK]

Originally posted by BenderOfStrings:

There are tons of guitar makers out there who make Les Paul clones that look much much closer to an actual Les Paul than the PRS singlecut. Why don't they go after them?

Because the Gibson company hates Paul Smith IMHO. I met Paul Smith at a PRS clinic last year. At the time the PRS Singlecut Trem model was just coming out. He talked a lot about how he always wanted to build a guitar that was like a Les Paul and like a Strat, but better. He targeted Gibson, now they're targeting back.

 

When I heard Paul Smith talk about the Singlecut and repeatedly mention Gibson in the same sentence I thought, "hmmm...surprised he hasn't been sued". At the time, I didn't know about this lawsuit. I don't like Les Pauls but I do like my Custom 22. This lawsuit is nothing but a personal attack on Paul Smith . Needless to say, I won't be buying a Gibson anytime soon.

 

Jim

[Darklava]

PRS are a bit pricey,and personably I like Les Paul's better.2000.00 PRS can't compare to a

2000.00 Les Paul,but that's me to each his own.

As far as the law suit goes...no comment.

[BenderOfStrings]

Originally posted by DARKLAVA:

PRS are a bit pricey,and personably I like Les Paul's better.2000.00 PRS can't compare to a

2000.00 Les Paul,but that's me to each his own.

As far as the law suit goes...no comment.

Yeah I agree. PRS guitars are GOOD. But there's just something about the look and sound of an LP.

[BenderOfStrings]

Nope, i'm sorry but you're wrong here. they've been gaining popularity ever since 1985 when they initially offered standard model. this is far from a fad or a "flavor of the month." no offense

Ok maybe "flavor of the month" is the wrong description. I suppose I'm not giving PRS guitars their due credit. What I meant was that you are seeing them more and more in music videos like the way you saw Kramers and BC Rich's in the music videos in the 80's. Chad Kroeger, Mark Tremonti, and Carlos Santana just off the top of my head. What I'm saying is that right now it seems to be "fashionable" to play a PRS. Virtually every other band I see on TV is playing a PRS (of course the OTHER half seems to be playing Gibsons

 

The real travesty here is how PRS is simply better at the business of building guitars than gibson. and rather than improve their own processes, gibson has given into lawsuits. how do you suppose les paul feels about this? has anyone seen/heard remarks from the man?[/QB]

PRS guitars are indeed beautifully made and they sound good but to say they are "simply better at the business of building guitars than gibson" Is not gospel fact, it's merely your opinion. I happen to like LP's better than PRS guitars so who's right here? Answer: nobody.

 

As far as you saying "why don't Gibson improve their own process?" Well, what exactly do they need to improve? They've been producing amazing high quality guitars for over 50 years. Just how many ways can you invent the wheel?!? Why hasn't gibson's single cut solid body electric changed all that much over the years? It dosen't need to. They got it right early on.

 

As far as this lawsuit nonsense, I'm actually on PRS side on this one. Other than the simple fact that it IS a single cut away guitar, the similarities end right there.

[revolead]

I for one have mixed feelings on the issue. As a not as big fan of PRS, I can't help but feel bias toward Gibson. PRS seems to sell to snobs (forgive me if you own one, I'm just speaking from experience) and rock stars. I used to enjoy bands with Gibson's because it almost is unique. I know this wasn't true in the 70s, but nowadays, like Benderofstrings said, PRS seems to be the fashionable instrument. You make it big, you HAVE to buy a PRS. It's like people gave up on Gibson, Fender, and everything in between. I don't think Gibson is afraid of losing sales, I think they're afraid of losing history and letting history repeat itself.

 

If I were Gibson, and I remembered the 60s and 70s, when almost everyone seemed to play a Gibson, even the people who owned Fenders (Hendrix, Clapton), I wouldn't want another company making the same mistake and expecting their guitar to be the flavor of the decade, just because it comes with a nice finish and custom wound pickups. Any guitar of any cost can be good. Does it play well? Yes. Does it sound good? Good, I'll take it. It's like a Ferrari and a Chevrolet. There's a certain sense of refinement and beauty with an Italian exotic, but it doesn't mean a Corvette can't have a good engine and handling as well, even if the Ferrari seems superior, it doesn't have to be the ONLY choice.

 

Now, as for the lawsuit, I don't think legal action was the best way to handle it, but I think someone needed to tell the music industry, especially one-hit-wonder and nu-metal bands, that there is life beyond a Paul Reed Smith.

[daddyelmis]

You want scary? Run a search at the US PTO trademark section on "gibson guitar corp" and look at all the design features they have trademarked: bridges, headstocks, pickguards, etc.

 

Terrifying. Of course, the fact they have obtained a registered mark for a pickguard doesn't necessarily mean they've got a lock--it just means nobody objected to the registration when it was published.

 

Personally, I'm in the camp that feels like this action by Gibson further alienates me from that guitar maker. I have thought for years that Gibson has been trying to methodically place itself on top of the heap of electric guitars in price -- without a related increase in quality (IMHO, YMMV).

 

At this point, I think PRS and Gibson are direct competitors because their price points, to me, are identical. And they've both introduced "entry level" models to get folks to buy a the $1000 point. But most of their guitars are in the $2500 and up range for what you'd want.

 

Personally, I've always been a Strat player, but own a lot of stuff. I've always found the single coil sound preferable -- I am now on the hunt for a P90 equipped axe, but this little maneuver by Gibson has put me off LP's (unless, of course, I find a steal on eBay!!).

 

BTW, Fender has registered the Strat and Tele headstocks as trademarks, and is trying for the Strat and Tele bodies.

 

A final observation is that many (most) of the Gibson trademarks are either on the Supplemental Register or have been placed on the Principal Register with a "2F" limitation -- what this means is that the trademarks themselve did not meet the PTO's qualifications as a trademark without Gibson showing that the marks had acquired "distinctiveness" in the marketplace; that is, the designs have come to be identified with Gibson as a manufacturer by the marketplace.

 

The "2F" indicates the part of the mark for which acquired distinctiveness was established as a condition for placement on the Principal Register. "Acquired" means distinctiveness that is not inherent, but achieved through continuous use and consumer recognition of the word, phrase, symbol, etc. acting as a trademark

 

Marks registered on the Supplemental Register can be "upgraded" to the Principal Register upon showing acquired distinctiveness -- which is generally met by 5 years of continuous use of the mark.

 

Gibson's going to have a whole bunch of guitar parts as trademarks once that 5 year clock runs. And it appears that they are not going to be shy about suing. The LP clones are in for a rough ride.

[Mudcat]

Based on what daddyelmis says above it sounds like the guitar parts manufacturers of the world will be paying a lot more licensing fees to Gibson & Fender. As a result, I guess we can anticipate the cost of necks and bodies for home-brew guitars to start going up in the future.