Court NUKES Gibson Vs. Dean Guitars Ruling!
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 09. 2024
- After a years-long appeal process, a court has reversed the ruling on the Gibson Vs. Dean Guitars trademark infringement case and it will be retried with new evidence! What does this mean for the future of intellectual property in the guitar industry? Gibson could still win the case again, but there's no guarantee.
Original article here: guitar.com/new...
Shred with my instructional programs: maxcarlisle.se...
---------
LINKS ABOVE include affiliate links!
Social Media -
Facebook: / maxcarlislemusic
Twitter: / maxxxwellc
Instagram: / guitar_max_carlisle
Want to release your own music? Sign up on DistroKid and save 7% with this link: distrokid.com/v...
www.guitarmaxmu...
Rubric: -5 points for Danzig references. -5 points for not reading the description. -5 points for not watching far enough into the video to answer your own question. -5 points for misquoting me in your comment. 20 points possible. Everyone starts with an A!
If fender already lost a case saying body's are not protected, it has precedence and this lawsuit should have been thrown out before it started
instead of working against them they should've worked with Dean, and maybe suggest they do off colors patterns. Now after putting me through this as a manufacture id make near identical models
@@SearchingForTone I think Gibson needs to fuck off they pulled this shit with kesel and kesel threatened to sue them back cause they trademarked their v before Gibson did
The biggest difference between a Dean and a Gibson is I can afford a Dean.
To be fair dean has some pricey stuff too. Some of those Mls are ridiculous lol.
If you wait 40 plus years to legally defend a trademark, then no trademark.
The consumer is smart enough to distinguish different guitar brands. Atleast 99%
Well, maybe 84.6%🤣
“I love the poorly educated!” ~iDJt
Especially when it comes to Dean with that god awful headstock that is bigger than the guitar body itself
@@quiksilver78 Prawn fork! LOL!
Good. The original ruling was absolutely ridiculous. BTW, I own several Gibsons and a couple Deans, as well as others. I have no brand loyalty. I just really dislike illogical, nonsensical legal rulings...and the original judge screwed this one up big time.
And when you get a jury summons?
@@CaptainCraigKWMRZ WTF does that even have to do with anything? Nice failed "gotcha" attempt. 🍿
@@CaptainCraigKWMRZ found the gibson employee 4:33
@@CaptainCraigKWMRZ😂 make it make sense !
@@CaptainCraigKWMRZ Hey, I live in Florida not too far from Tampa. I'd volunteer for this retrial.
Also Gibson: Let's make a Stratocaster under Kramer.
Kramer guitars are great guitars.
Also Dean: Let's re-release the Dimebag series guitars, without paying Dimebag's widow.
@@ChrisTopherBunnell😂 when did that happen ?
@@auntjenifer7774that's been going on for a while. Very disrespectful.
@@auntjenifer7774 "The estate of Dimebag Darrell has announced the termination of the late Pantera guitarist’s posthumous endorsement deal with Dean Guitars, and has also filed a lawsuit against Dean’s parent company, Armadillo Enterprises, for allegedly breaching the terms of their contract.
The suit also accuses the company of filing 'unauthorized and fraudulent trademark registrations' pertaining to the Razorback and Stealth body shapes.
In a statement posted on Dimebag Darrell’s (real name Darrell Lance Abbott) website, the guitarist’s partner, Rita Haney, announced the end of the Dime estate’s relationship with Dean.
'After much consideration, it is with great sadness that I announce the longstanding relationship between Dimebag and Dean Guitars is over,' she wrote. 'Unfortunately, we were forced to file a lawsuit against Dean Guitars… It was necessary for us to end Dime’s endorsement of Dean Guitars to continue to honor and celebrate his legacy the way he deserves, and in the way he had laid it out.'
The statement also attached the copy of a complaint and demand for a jury trial, which was filed in the US District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division. The suit lays out a series of grievances that date back to when Abbott signed his original endorsement deal with Dean back in November 2004.
Abbott was tragically murdered just weeks later on 8 December 2004, but Dean continued to produce Dimebag guitars posthumously, releasing a series of models based on the Razorback and Stealth body shapes, as well as Dean’s existing ML design.
The suit claims that the Dimebag guitars doubled Dean’s sales inside two years, but that the company had neglected to make payments for various contract stipulations in the years since, and had attempted to 'water down Abbott’s endorsement' when the contract was renegotiated while the estate was under the supervision of his older brother and Pantera/Damageplan bandmate, Vinnie Paul, who himself died in 2018." (Josh Gardner, Guitar dott Com, August 17, 2021.)
My family has played Gibson Acoustics for over 70 years and i own 2 and went thru numerous Gibson Electrics in the past. my 1975 Gibson Marauder had an "arrow" shaped headstock instead of the open book and i don't think Gibson got sued by others who used that headstock shape? or is that Patented too?? Gibson needs to stop with the lawsuits and kick lawyers out of their factories and get back to making quality, affordable guitars that justifies paying more for the "Gibson" name and logo. Sad that the Collector Market full of Richie Rich's is what Gibson Guitars has become. If they want to be the Rolls Royce of Overpriced, Over hyped Guitars, they better accept garnering only1% of the Guitar Market .
I 👍
Rich's? Rich's what?
@@DMSProduktions Come on....yu've seen vids of those dudes who go out and buy a gaggle of NOS of some sort of "Collector" Les Pauls.
@@cacornhusker2940 Whoosh!
Good for Dean, no doubt gibson used to be a monolith but the company has become terrible on all fronts. Overpriced guitars, bad quality control, gatekeeping body shapes. Just glad there's so many decent alternatives these days. Gibson couldn't have done a better job at selling me one of these Deans tho
Gibson and Epiphone are most certainly not overpriced you people want top quality for a cheap price that will never happen with Epiphones or Gibsons get used to it it's never going to happen..you can either afford Epiphones and Gibsons or you can't it's that simple..
@@BlueberryStinkFinger62 Wait, so your argument to "bad quality control" was "nuh uh!!!" and then "you're POOR!" lmao
@@dairycowtv most of you lie through your teeth many of you including Guitar Max have been caught over and over again lying..it's mostly from the ones who can't afford Epiphones or Gibson it's so easy today to take what BS your trying to claim and go to the fancy thinking box called a computer 🖥️💻 and prove your lying..you are not or will you ever get Epiphones and Gibsons for a cheap price..
@@dairycowtvhmm personally you're lying and can't afford Epiphones or Gibsons that's obvious.
Dean QA isn't that great either, just sayin
Epiphone? They've been absolutely stellar, so you _can actually_ get top quality for a lower price. It just won't say Gibson on the top bit.
Gibson at this point is like Ferrari. Collectors, decorating walls, and "investments" to befuddle the tax man.
Everyone should be able to make any shape they want and let the consumer decide on the quality and decide.
We should probably make all classical instruments have different body shapes, according to big guitar company logic. Don't you dare make your violin look like mine.
Does anyone actually like Gibson at this point? Their old guitars are great but the company just sucks! I’ve no clue why anyone pays the ridiculous price for a new Gibson with so many nice used ones around.
Crazy how this legal battle has been going as long as I’ve been playing guitar, I remember dying to be a Dean Artist
Gibson has become such a piss poor run company. Rather than fix QC issues and innovate new designs they sue and build over priced guitars.
I live in middle Tn and Gibson has a horrible reputation as one of the worst companys to work for here.
The legacy is being destroyed
Why did it take gibson 40 years to do this
So...if body shapes can be trademarked, how many brands of cellos look not like other cellos?
And all of those round drums! 🤭
Almost half a century without doing anything? Yeah I don’t know where they thought they could win that.
Also, fuck Gibson. Overpriced as fuck
Especially when epiphone has similar guitars for less than Gibson that sound amazing for their price!
I would have sympathy with Gibson if they were innovating and investing heavily in R&D. But they aren’t, they are just milking the genius of one dead former employee and the music scene of the 1960s and 70s.
And the shapes they are upset with Dean about aren’t even a big part of Gibsons image and promotion.
And there is no way you are looking at a Dean and thinking it’s a Gibson.
If the body is protected then Martin can sue every company that makes acoustic guitars. Martin was making guitars what 70 years before Gibson? The 70’s and 80’s guitar companies were popping up everywhere why wouldn’t they do it back then? Makes no sense. Gibson and fender could have had a really good case back then. Nowadays you can order pretty much any “style” of guitar online from endless different companies.
I own the less Paul and a explorer both are Gibson. But I don't think that Gibson should be able to hold the patent on those shapes. Patents run out and then become general public domain where anybody can make it. That's just how it works that's how come everybody can make a television. Or a car.
Michael schenker should do a video endorsing Dean guitars. He plays them, and plays them well.
I'm gonna copyright the TRIANGLE... lol..
Well, not to.mwntion the headstocks are usually shaped different and the logos are obviously different. Thats where every consumer looks to see what brand a guitar is. Not the body.
Didn't Gibson had the lawsuit over the headstock in the 70's , suing among others Japanese guitar manufacturers, but not going after the guitar body shape ?
Not only that Gibson already LOST their rights to more than a few shapes in the EU, same reasons as Fender: they slept on the enforcement of their copyrights for too long and lost those rights by default.
I dropped by Guitar Center and SG’s were $2000.00, couldn’t believe it, 5 years ago you could get one for a grand
That’s just inflation
@@BandXshow inflated purely by ego alone, at least there's some great competition that was somehow magically unaffected by the economy
Since the COVID pandemic, and the broken supply chain, everything has gone up by about 100 percent. The almighty dollar is now worth about 6 cents!
@mmccartney6579 seems like it's only affected brands like gibson/epiphone with ego maniacs in charge that think their history justifies the ridiculous price. Don't get me wrong I know everything else is increasing, but in the gear world it's been pretty rational if you aren't caught up by the nostalgia of these outdated designs. Fender/squire hasn't even gotten as out of touch with reality as gibson/epiphone and they have more reasons to justify it
@@mmccartney6579 Funny how it's more like the top tier brands went up 200% during Covid and the lower tiers just sold like mad after going up 20%.
I do not think Strat and Explorer/V story is the same. I do not think Fender did anything to register it as a trademark or pathented it. However in both cases other companies started to make thes body shapes and their ogiginal makes did not care for a long time. If they did not care, these shapes are no more synonymus with their original brands and this fact should result in loosing the rights.
Hard to protect and defend the trademark after 40 years of others copying the design.
EVH did it. He let peeps copy frankie for decades before he shut it down. Where was the outcry of that clown doing what Gibson tried?
Look at the automotive or airplane/airline industry and other than certain intellectual properties, and of course their logo, they all pretty much look the same. Gibson should put the money and efforts they spend on lawsuits into quality control and innovation.
I think either way it goes, it should be seen as a win for the customer. We either get more companies doing classic body shapes with features the original companies don't offer, or we get companies creating all kinds of new shapes cause they're trying to steer clear of a lawsuit.
I am an attorney. Gibson's claims were nonsensical. Gibson sat on its hands for years while Dean was making Explorers and Vs. You can't do that.
I don't understand how lawyers can withhold exonerating evidence.
Legally they can’t. The judge in Alec Baldwin’s trial dismissed the case with prejudice over the prosecution doing exactly that
This would’ve been flood gates for going after every single maker. Strat style, tele style. Just focus on the quality and the consumers will follow. Instead of fighting maybe they should collab and be like hey we’ll do these colors and finishes you do these…work together not against.
Did not expect to see an Edguy shirt. Hell yeah!
I think if Gibson spent half the time and energy focused on making great guitars (especially affordable guitars) that they do litigating other companies to stop them from making great affordable guitars, they would be much better served. I also feel that many "artists" find this type of action distasteful, which can't be helping Gibson's reputation. I know I lost interest in owning a Gibson years ago, and this behavior only reinforces that decision.
Only the name brand can be protected. The design of the body or neck is not protected. Fair use laws allow for fair use of ideas unless it is patented and even then it can get weedy in court.
Gibson would do themselves a favor by putting the money they are wasting suing other guitar builders back into their manufacturing to reduce cost and improve quality (ahem.. volutes). No refrigerators, no hot air balloons, just guitars. Stay in your lane, Gibson.
gibson please worry about the over price guitars your ripping people off with, not what everyone else is doing you just don't want people to have better options
I think this is a silly lawsuit. Nobody is going to mistake a Dean for a Gibson.
If for no other reason, the headstocks are quite different. But also, Dean are known to make colours Gibson never offered as well as putting flamed maple tops on guitars that Gibson never put those tops on.
Now, I may be incorrect in this with regard to why Fender lost a similar lawsuit, but I recall that Leo Fender never filed patents or registered trademarks for his instruments. And I'm not even sure that CBS did, acter buying the company from him. Neglecting to do this, in addition to Fender (regardless of who owned the company) never taking anyone to court for copying his designs, lead to the loss of that lawsuit when it was finally made.
Gibson sued several guitar manufacturers like Ibanez back in the day and could only stop them from using the open book headstock style but they didn't win on body styles. Dean has been making Vs and Explorer shapes for decades and Gibson did nothing at all! All of a sudden Gibson got sue happy! There are many guitar manufactures who make Explorer and V style guitars for ages yet Gibson ignores them. Gibson needs to stop suing people and concentrate on making guitars, improving their quality control and making their guitars more affordable.
I want a video from Mark Agnesi on this news.
Snarky Marky.
Lol
Fantastic presentation-I always enjoy your videos. Thank you
I do not think that we buy our guitars just for a body shape, a lot more goes into our decisions, Takamini was making Strats in the early Seventys
And they stopped because of threat of being sued, not sure if you mean Martin, I have an imitation Martin I bought in 1980 for $275.00 and best acoustic ever then Martin sued them, wish I kept the guitar
I buy them based solely on shape. Anything else can be changed.
Gibson would have been in the right, if they'd brought the case in 1977 or 1978. Heck, even 1985 (because apparently it can take lawyers _years_ to build a case). But they waited until 2019, a full _forty two years_ after Dean introduced the shapes.
Here's the thing: Dean used to be bigger. They went after a failing company. The intent was clearly to settle with assets and intellectual property. It was never meant to go this far.
Thanks for the reminder not to buy from the Gibson conglomerate!
Remember it took Gibson till 2005 to take legal action in Japan specifically against fernades/burny
They would have lost then. Dean had given Gibson the dimensions and build instructions in the '60s since Gibson had lost them and not made them after the initial run.
To hell with all those guys
As someone in the legal industry, it's cool to hear you break this down the way you have. Legal nerdery and guitars -- doesn't get any better, lol.
As a kid, I ached for that black/gold V-Explorer mashup thing, forget the name, but it rocked my perception of guitars. I got the 1979 catalogue through USPS as a kid and would take a few bong hits before bed every night, and dream about that guitar until was tattooed on my 20-year-old psyche. I have a conundrum with this on a few levels though. Stealing sucks, but in the 70s, copying was so widespread across the industry, it appeared there was a tacit okay to do so. A budget company could be counted on to copy a Fender or Gibson somewhere in their lineup. it was a normal of the era. Dean's interpretations were pretty unique, in that no one was going to mistake a Dean for a Gibson. Like comparing a baseball to a softball ... they both are round and have stitching, but that is where the similarity ends.
In the end, neither company are taking sales away from the other one. Gibson has not suffered any long-term damages, which you need in a legal action of this nature. Gibson people are cult-like and adamant in their choice of instruments. Deans appeal to a very small cross-section of the guitar-playing public in this era, relatively speaking, and they will specifically want a Dean. Subjectively, this may even help Gibson in some weird way, but I'm getting long-winded, so I'll save it for another screed.
As always, great stuff Maxxx ... As an old guy, you are one of the only CZcams guitarists I will never yell at to get offa my lawn ☮
Didn't Hamer also get sued by Gibson? I remember them making lots of V's and Explorer shapes for Rick Nelson of Cheap Trick
Thanks Max. Awesome news Good for Dean & Armadillo. And the entire guitar buying population of the USA in particular, But the whole world as well. Maybe if Dean hadn't been producing V's and Explorer type guitars since the 1970's I could kinda see Gibson's issue a little bit? (I'll even agree that " Evan Rubinson" Seems to pretty much a CHUD)
But no way am I on Gibson's side the way it unfolded, I will never do business with Gibson again.
Which sucks because I really wanted a Maestro Fuzz Tone reissue. I had an original when I was a kid... But Nope unless I score a used one off a private individual.
I can’t write this in too many comments before/until it begins to change. Gibson has their priorities completely backwards. They need to lower the prices on brand new guitars, amplifiers and accessories so that more customers will be interested in purchasing them. They also need to focus on quality control, not to mention taking suggestions from the customers about what kinds of instruments they should be building. Jacking up the prices on production models, fueling the inflation rate of vintage models, not permitting oneself to move forward from templates that have been hammered to death and constantly taking Armadillo to court because of perceived but unproven copyright infringement on the part of Dean is no way to run a business.
That'll never happen. Gibson is happy with their "Build ridiculously overpriced art house guitars for retired lawyers, cash in with ever-increasing prices, send actual musicians running to the competition" business model.
every company should start chucking out exact gibbo copies with open book headstocks - time to put Gibson out of business
Maybe it's time for ESP to bring back the original exp and mx model guitars, made famous by James Hetfield.
So what about Les Paul body styles. ESP, Sheckter, and a big number of other manufacturers have LPs in their portfolio. Jackson made flying v's as well.
I really, really, really hope that Dean wins. Then we can see more companies make similar shapes and not only do we get more choices, but if Gibson wants to show that they're guitars made for players then they can reevaluate their pricing.
Lather....Rinse....Repeat .....
Hell yeah Bring back Dean V's those were some kickass guitars
Are you a HAM radio operator. Just like Kramer Guiters in the early 80's building Fender head stock guitars and had to reshape the headstock to the beak shape.
Gibson should take a look at Martin. Pretty much every acoustic brand makes dreadnought guitars. Yet Martin can still sell their Dreadnoughts, and people still want Martins.
Hey, man. I just noticed that the Leo Jaymz Double Cut suddenly has an offset to the cutaways. It was not there in the last batch! Any idea if Gibson had anything to do with this?
Gibson can get stuffed. If you make any kind of art, you can expect folks to recreate it with their own spin. That's just how it works. 🤷🏻♂️
So true, if they focused on quality then they wouldn’t have to worry about anything.
@@SearchingForTone Dean makes Gibsons for people who like good value, quality instruments 😂
@@johnfowl3656 preach, “the working man’s”, beer and spray cheese no Chianti and caviar
Go Dean, go! And not just because I dislike Gibson for fleecing their customers for $25 capacitors or $1,000 pickups. Waiting until your company is hemorrhaging money to sue someone for a body style they've been making for 40+ years is just ridiculous.
EDIT: Body style should absolutely be allowed because there are only so many body styles you can make before all the "sane" ones are taken. After that, no more new guitar manufacturers, period. I also think headstock designs shouldn't be trademarked or copyrighted unless there is something especially unique about them (ie: the ball at the end of a Fender headstock), and only that part can be trademarked or copyrighted. Again, there are only a limited number of possibilities and when they run out, no more new guitar manufacturers.
Trademark names, both model and brand, absolutely. And go after counterfeiters. but let us choose the manufacturers we want with the body styles we want.
Why, thank you Max!
I'm truly here for the finery that is unavailable elsewhere!
That means...individuality!
Thanks for knowing how to find your own forte!
I am digging ya!
Peace, friend!
KC
Gibson's low quality should be considered when letting them limit market participants, ANY guitar producer should be able to compete with a Non-Gibson head-stock design.
I started learning guitar in the early 90s, it was all nirvana, smashing pumpkins, and so on. I guess I missed the whole fascination with Gibson guitars, maybe it’s more of a boomer thing. I own just about every brand except Gibson. I just cannot justify spending $4000 for a guitar, when I can get a quality alternative for much less. I have an expensive Taylor, but my sweet spot is around $1000 whether new or used. I have a high income and I can afford it, I just don’t see any benefit to spending more than that on an electric. Acoustics are another story. I do not own a Dean now, but I will be buying one to support this company. Ultimately Gibson is trying to take our options away from us. Fuck them. They should make better guitars with better quality control instead of suing people over shapes. What next? Are they going to claim that they own the shape of a circle? A star? A square? They focused on the high-end of the market, and they ignored young people. Us young people are now older and don’t want their guitars.
Bottom line: Gibbo just left it way TOO long!
They aren't LIKE Rickenbacker!
THEY quash anything that sails too close to a Ric design!
It doesn't take a lawyer to figure it out. Body shape is out the window. Anyone can make any body shape. Just because Fender and Gibson went out of their way to make their guitars not look like each other...
Gibson those new Kramers sure do look like a Jackson Soloist, just saying
Does anyone know why Fender and Gibson waited so long to sue? It seems like this would have been a bigger deal back in the 80's than today. Though maybe sales are down, and so Fender and Gibson decided to sue more recently to try and get a bigger piece of the pie by blocking competitors from using those designs?
Probably because the competitors back in the day made shittier quality guitars and Gibson and Fender were known for their quality. Now the competitors have stepped up their game in quality and even new cool designs, while Fender and Gibson have slipped and focused on marketing themselves as luxury brands, instead of brands that made good gear.
Aloha,
Servo now owns Fender so WTH 🤦♂️
Who has the patent on circles curves flat plains and straight edged lines, Gibson ?
Because they’re using these shapes
Screw Gibson or anyone who claims they have exclusive rights to any shape .. it’s all bullshit
There's nothing wrong with protecting your intellectual property.
Gibson just failed to do so.
You must actively protect the trademark or its forfeit.
That's crazy dude! Thanks for the update.
You know what i think i saw this news yesterday i was like YES in your face Gibson why play authentic when you can get your wings , Im just really excited i can get the z and v models again🤘
Hopefully we get the esp mx220/250 back
The headstock is the issue with those.
Great piece Max, I’ll keep this short & sweet! C’mon Gibson, get the fuck outta courts & get back to doin what you used to great! Making quality instruments that people who have worked for a couple of years can afford!!
Its understandable for a company to want to protect their inventions, although doing it very late... The question is: should other instrument manufacturers fall into the same category or not? I find it weird that violins,piano's,harps,...are never even concidered within this topic. It just doesnt seem logical that such court ruling would only apply to guitar companies.
Imagine Gibson having the sole right to produce solid-body guitars because they brought it to market first before the rest. It seems to me that there should be rules in place to prevent certain measures like that.
My two cents: A guitar company should have the right to produce any shape they want IF they payed royalties for said shape/type of guitar, set within rules. Just compare it to car manufacturors that buy rights and licences to produce the same vehicle,be it with rebadging and changing certain elements to distinguish one brand from the other. The Dean V and Z could work perfectly within those rules IF they changed a few things up to ensure that there could be NO mistake in recognizing either.
There are guitar companies that do exactly what i mentioned here. and they are doing just fine. Banker,Maybach,...those do exactly that and it is the only correct way of doing honest business.
Credit where credit is due. That same saying apply's to most trade's around the world. Well...unless you're China ofcourse...-.-'
Hey, Max! I just saw a video I don’t remember seeing before. You and Dovy Das playing together at an impromptu jam. Wow, you smoke, bro! I’m a future paying customer. You’ll see.
Excellent. That was probably on Dovydas' channel!
As a hobbiest guitar builder I feel the restriction of body shapes as a limitation of creativity even if an infringement or copy being created. Everyone has their own take on certain styles of things. These big corporations have acted as head hunters and ruined smaller businesses just because they can.
Go Dean! He made ZZ Top’s spinning furry guitars back in the 70s and they were the Flying V models. I have a couple of Deans guitars and wouldn’t trade them for anything, unless I was offered a 80ft. yacht and a beachfront house 😂 I’d still have to buy a new DZ guitar 😊
Intellectual property laws exist for a reason. However, if a manufacturer has been copying your designs for 45 years and you never say a word, you shouldn't be able to file suit. I love my 1965 Gibson, but would never buy another
I learned on a Dean flying V 🎸🎸🎸
I think Dean can't lose. Imagine that. It would pave the way...for example...for like a PRS Explorer style guitar.
The PRS Explorer is something I haven't realized I needed, lol
@@tulio.guitar I cannot lie. I am not a fan of PRS....BUT I could be. An archtop Explorer with one of those PRS bookmatched tops and how they do their controls and the birds on the neck. Man I could be into that very very easily.
I'm definitely a fan of PRS. Would love to see them build a carved top explorer. They could do it really well.
I haven't counted how many China companies on Amazon make a t style les style and s style for years and no one bothers them but make a better guitar and oh brother watch out 😅😅😅😊 6:50
Example, your reviews of Firefly guitars, showing their obvious quality!
well there goes the prices of the v and z from going up
Ah ..ha ha ha ha! Who was first....?
Martin was.
Who was second?
Epiphone was....and acquired by Gibson in '57.
Awesome! Piss off Gibson! Justice is served!.
You Rock Max!
Vert interesting topic.Bangin hair as usual
It's their new president who I understand doesn't understand really anything about any of it other than trying to squash the competition if Gibson made guitars the way they used to make guitars it would be no issue it would be hands down people would be scooping up Gibson's but they don't like competition and so they sit and think and brainstorm ways to squash the competition which is what business does but they think we're stupid they think we're too stupid to understand what's going on and that's another reason Gibson is failing
Max: Here's a crazy, insane, possibly even dumb question. However in the day and age, it just may not be so far fetched; Would Gibson ever merge with Dean? Or, would the Epiphone arrangement make that unlikely?
Epiphones are made in the same Chinese factories on the same cnc machines by the same production line staff as all those other alleged cheap nasty Chinese made guitars!
The pricing is decided by the home management team!
No, they are made in a dedicated parent owned facility with employees Chinese and American, which I have read is not connected with the government over there.
So basically only the head- stalk shapes are officially company property 😮🤔🤔🤔
If you can prove the shape isn’t exactly the same there’s nothing they can do. Should also be a grandfather clause on something like this anyway. If Gibson is so great, what are they worried about? China has made more replicas of their guitars than any single company.
I’m not buying a Dean I’m not buying a Gibson 🤦🏻♂️
I was under the impression the headstock is all that matters. I know guitar players can be derpy, but I like to believe we know the difference between the words Dean and Gibson. Imagine that, people being able to read.
Good for Dean, I own three Dean guitars, 2 deceive rs and 1 Schenker v, awesome guitars. 😊
Don't forget, Dean re-released the Dimebag series guitars without paying Dimebag's widow.
EDGUY rocks!
Is that a Baofeng radio behind you?
Kinda. It's a Radtel. But Baofeng makes a similar model.
@@GuitarMAXMusic Sweet!
Let ESP/LTD make Explorers again!
As awesome as that would be, I don’t see them bringing back the MX220 in western markets. They would still have to change the headstock, and they already offer an explorer-like body shape that’s more in line with their current design language (the EX shape). I’d love if they did though!
I hope Seger brings back his carved top V’s.
Yes!
EDGUY T SHIRT YES
What about the most copied guitar, the Stratocaster? LOL
Apparently Fender isn't insecure about having a tiny PP like Gibson seems to be.
They made a whole lot of epiphone strats, teles, p basses and jazz basses. Not much talk about that. Then they bought Kramer. Do they have anything to say about their blatant hypocrisy?
This is great for me! My signature series V is literally a Gibson 2016 Pro V (plus tons of features) built on Gibson machines but with a different label, so in the meantime I can expand sales to the USA not just Asia! (pictured on my profile pic).
It's the only thing Gibson has left. Not making exceptional instruments anymore. I'll take budget brands every day
Gibson needs to take a hit for making extreme profits anyway. They price gouged because they were one of the best at one time and in the name of profits are trying to stop fair competition.