PRS and Gibson are arguing Trademarks again...

Offset

^^ Thanks @Litterick.

"...consumers are likely to mistakenly believe Theodore guitars are associated with PRS and the McCarty Estate, so Registrant's use of the Theodore mark creates a likelihood of confusion."

I have to say that the above is about as tenuous and unlikely as it's possible to be, and anyone splashing out £4-5k on a Theodore is going to be 99.9% certain as to what they're buying and the associations that come with it.

prowla

fretmeister said:

Tannin said:

Gibson's lawyers should go and work for Donald Trump. They are on about his level.

Absolute nonsense.

Lawyers are not the client / party. They take instructions from their client and do as they are told.
Every lawyer on earth has argued for a point on Monday and against it on Tuesday. That's the job.

What next? Accuse lawyers of being murderers just because they represent an alleged murderer?

Lawyers do try and stir the pot, though...

Sporky

I didn't make it all the way through Harry Potter - was Theodore the owl or the shifty-looking one?

Tannin

fretmeister said:

Tannin said:

Gibson's lawyers should go and work for Donald Trump. They are on about his level.

Absolute nonsense.

Lawyers are not the client / party. They take instructions from their client and do as they are told.
Every lawyer on earth has argued for a point on Monday and against it on Tuesday. That's the job.

What next? Accuse lawyers of being murderers just because they represent an alleged murderer?

I was sloppy in my expression, but my point is 100% valid. What I should have written is that the people directing Gibson's legal policy are slimeheads who should be working for Donald Trump. 

And who directs their legal policy?

Well, probably their lawyers.

PS: do you know what the best thing about the slimebag lawyers working for Trump and his cronies is? They end up not getting paid half the time. 

Alexlotl

I had no idea Ted McCarty was called Theodore prior to this lawsuit.

I wonder if Fender or G&L could sue me if I released a guitar called the Leonidas?

nacnudnai

Tannin said:

fretmeister said:

Tannin said:

Gibson's lawyers should go and work for Donald Trump. They are on about his level.

Absolute nonsense.

Lawyers are not the client / party. They take instructions from their client and do as they are told.
Every lawyer on earth has argued for a point on Monday and against it on Tuesday. That's the job.

What next? Accuse lawyers of being murderers just because they represent an alleged murderer?

I was sloppy in my expression, but my point is 100% valid. What I should have written is that the people directing Gibson's legal policy are slimeheads who should be working for Donald Trump. 

And who directs their legal policy?

Well, probably their lawyers.

PS: do you know what the best thing about the slimebag lawyers working for Trump and his cronies is? They end up not getting paid half the time. 

Just purely for the sake of accuracy, with no ill intentions at all:

Lawyers don't direct legal policy. They would advise those who direct legal policy, and offer recommendations and state what the law has to say about a potential decision or act. 

How legal policy (if what is meant is legal strategy) is directed varies depending on the structure of a company of course. But, it would either be directed by an MD, owner, in-house legal department or legal director (not an exhaustive list). In my experience, none of those are "lawyers". 

If Gibson use external IP lawyers (I haven't looked into whether they do), their lawyers will purely advise on risks of a strategy, potential strength of a case and possible solutions. They will never say "here's an idea, sue PRS for Silver Sky". It is Gibson's board of directors ultimately governing strategy, the lawyers just advise and file the paperwork. Gibson would sign off on any of that before it is filed.

I know the Trump comment is a joke/hyperbole, but in terms of relatively, even if you aren't a fan of Gibson and their legal policy - whoever is making the decision is nowhere near Trump's level, and definitely not Gibson's lawyers. There is a bit of a difference between filing a slightly silly (but entirely admissable) legal proceeding Vs trying to halt the democratic exchange of power and trying to argue that a president could have Seal Team murder a political rival and have immunity from any criminal prosecution!

Fingers657

The USA laws are really complicated because of state differences.
They need to amalgamate everyone to one set of laws that covers the whole country.
As it stands now it’s a bloody mess that just makes money for legal systems in all states in different ways which is so wrong.

Litterick

This is a federal matter, in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, before The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Gibson is represented by Bates & Bates LLC of Atlanta GA; they have a long relationship. PRS and the McCarty estate are represented by Venable LLC of Washington DC. This is not a frivolous matter, for any party.

I suppose Gibson may have insisted on the counter-claim to highlight what it sees as the absurdity of the PRS claim. PRS has moved to sever the claim and counter-claim, in the interests of efficiency and fairness. on the grounds that they are unrelated. And so it continues.

digitalkettle

Alexlotl said:

I wonder if Fender or G&L could sue me if I released a guitar called the Leonidas?

Has to be a limited edition of 300.

stonevibe

Looks like a new Theodore model is coming from Gibson with twin humbuckers.

https://guitarbomb.com/2024/01/16/are-we-about-to-see-a-new-gibson-theodore-model/

Philly_Q

stonevibe said:

Looks like a new Theodore model is coming from Gibson with twin humbuckers.

https://guitarbomb.com/2024/01/16/are-we-about-to-see-a-new-gibson-theodore-model/

Like a Theodore Standard to the original's Theodore Special, as it were.  I know it'll be an unpopular viewpoint, but I like it!

Offset

stonevibe said:

Looks like a new Theodore model is coming from Gibson with twin humbuckers.

https://guitarbomb.com/2024/01/16/are-we-about-to-see-a-new-gibson-theodore-model/

Well one thing won't change. It'll still be fecking ugly.

Musical_Mystery_Tour

If it was some two hundred quid impulse buy on Ebay, the claim might have some basis, but the idea that anyone would pay that much for a guitar, yet not know anything of its origins and thus be confused about any endorsement it either did or did not carry, is just utter bollocks. 

Litterick

The claim has some basis, otherwise it would not be heard. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, which is hearing this claim, will use the thirteen Du Pont factors when determining whether a likelihood of confusion exists between the two trademarks:

1. The similarity or dissimilarity of the marks in their entireties as to appearance, sound, connotation and commercial impression.
2. The similarity or dissimilarity and nature of the goods or services as described in an application or registration or in connection with which a prior mark is in use.
3. The similarity or dissimilarity of established, likely-to-continue trade channels.
4. The conditions under which and buyers to whom sales are made, i. e. “impulse” vs. careful, sophisticated purchasing.
5. The fame of the prior mark (sales, advertising, length of use).
6. The number and nature of similar marks in use on similar goods.
7. The nature and extent of any actual confusion.
8. The length of time during and conditions under which there has been concurrent use without evidence of actual confusion.
9. The variety of goods on which a mark is or is not used (house mark, “family” mark, product mark).
10. The market interface between applicant and the owner of a prior mark. For example, (a) a mere “consent” to register or use, (b) agreement provisions designed to preclude confusion, such as limitations on continued use of the marks by each party, (c) assignment of mark, application, registration and good will of the related business, and (d) laches and estoppel attributable to owner of prior mark and indicative of lack of confusion.
11. The extent to which applicant has a right to exclude others from use of its mark on its goods.
12. The extent of potential confusion. For example, whether de minimis or substantial.
13. Any other established fact probative of the effect of use.

57Deluxe

special for spring - Gibson 'Tulip' guitar - perfect for pots and open borders

 

DrJazzTap

It looks like homers car

Philly_Q

I probably said so earlier in the thread, but I really like the Theodore design.  I'm unlikely to buy one though.

(Edit:  I see I did say that, just a bit further up the page.)

stonevibe

DrJazzTap said:

It looks like homers car

Want to lol and add wisdom for this

BobHillman

But doesn't the name "The Odore" bring to mind an unpleasant smell?

drwiddly

That is a pig ugly guitar and I used to own an M3!!