Dean vs Gibson: How Gibson WON by Losing...
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 сер 2024
- Matt Esquire explains the recent shocking turn of events in the ever-present Gibson vs Dean litigation. Many folks, including @GuitarMAXMusic , @KDH , and @PhillipMcKnight have noted this as a huge victory for Dean and a crushing defeat for Gibson. Matt believes there's a huge upside Gibson just won by losing.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #1 НАЧАЛО ПУТЕШЕСТВИЯ [Новый сезон] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/380Q7gLWGvk/mqdefault.jpg)
Larry David owned Dean?
Your sense of humor is lousy.
That's pretty pretty pretty good
Good old pin of shame
Great video! Does Dimarzio's protection of their trademark make a difference when comparing the two cases? Gibson under Norlin didn't seem to get sue happy over trademarks until the Japanese LP copies got out of hand in the late 70s.
DiMarzio has fought to protect the mark and won, while Gibson didn’t protect their mark until recently. So, it would seem DiMarzio has a stronger legal footing. However, they have also failed to protect the mark many times, perhaps because the infringers were small builders, not large corporations. Just a guitar player here, not a legal expert.
What about “Chibsons?” Wouldn’t/couldn’t DEAN use the influx of these guitars as part of generic bias, as well as Gibsons lack of defending their trademarks and patents against those companies, as a defence for DEAN? - Gibson has to go after everyone… not just 1 company.
@@doctersound9630 Chibsons are a different issue (check out our video we did with Guitar Max) but basically the Chibsons are handled by the US government and not Gibson.
@@blueslawyer Will do. Thanks boss!
Nice video. Thank you. 🤘🏻😎🤘🏻
Thanks doc!
I sort of question your budgeting, and sort of agree with you. Yes, pretrial activity leading up to the first day of trial is the bulk of the expense. But a new trial doesn't start over as if it was the first day of trial again. You back up to a few weeks or months before that first day. Sometimes you have to retake expert depositions because in the five years since the trial an expert or two have passed away. There might be something about the appellate ruling that requires limited additional discovery. All those in limine motions are getting filed again. If Gibson is using a Big Law firm, they've got a partner on the file billing at more than $1k per hour, with probably three or four additional attorneys who bill at between $600 and $900 per hour. And with Big Law comes things like getting to pay a second time for the preparation of a motion in limine on issue X or Y, so you get to repay some of those prep costs. And some of that repayment is totally legit-I've got to read through all the depos again a few times so that all that stuff is at my fingertips again. If I had to guess, Phil has talked to someone who has seen a budget estimate of $3M, which probably constitutes a Big Law firm covering their butt by laying out the budget for a worst case scenario. So I agree that Phil's number is probably not real, but if Gibson is using Big Law on this case, I wouldn't be surprised for the retrial to cost seven figures. Low seven figures, like right at $1.0M, or maybe $1.2M. But I'd doubt they'd bring the trial at something like $300,000. Now, if Gibson is using a small, boutique firm that runs their cases a lot tighter, then yes, they might get through a retrial for $300,00 or $400,000. It's not an unreasonable estimate-but it depends wildly on who is billing and who is willing to pay those bills.
As a guitarist I can tell the difference between a Gibson Les Paul and it's Epiphone counterpart even if it has the open book headstock. And everything else is easier to tell from there. Price point considered the consumer these days still has a better chance of buying a Chibson than mistaking any other brand for one.
I like both brands. But im with dean on this.
Awesome, informative video. Can Dean now resume making the V and Z models? Or is the injunction still in place?
@@kevinfoster4468 thanks! they've been selling the Z and V for a bit now
Thank you. I should've been clearer. I was referring to the more rounded style of V's and Explorers that were very similar to, if not exact copies of Gibson's guitars, not the current Zero and Vengeance models. Those models have sharper edges, similar to Jackson.
Judgment was vacated. That would include the injunction.
However, they still have to worry about getting foreclosured on.
Oh ok. I understand. Thank you for your unique perspective.
@MatthewBaron I don't think they have to worry about getting foreclosed on, they are making plenty of guitars and plenty of sales to be able to cover their build and bills, especially since the embezzling step son is gone😂
The Fifth Circuit issues some really bizarre rulings. But this one is exactly right.
Absolutely fantastic have a wonderful weekend ❤😊
While it wasn't on par with Roe v Wade - it was surprising. Looking good in the suit!
The yard buckers are just standard spec custombuckers with white bobbins
@@adamwatson6916 yeah but it'll come with a leather case and a certificate
This might be a dumb question. Do these trade marks ever run out? Like patterns do. After enough years will any company be able to use a Gibson head stock?
@@derekhand7904 trademarks can last forever, but Matt can tell me I'm wrong --jack
I'm guessing it won't have a huge impact on DiMarzio. I knew about them way before I knew about their double-creme trademark. Sure, it's a nice-to-have as a trademark, but it's not gamebreaking. I could literally just buy bobbin-toppers to get the same look if I wanted to.
How much did Gibson win ? How much did Gibson pay for court costs and lawyer fees for both sides ?
If this would result in a judgement against DiMarzio, would DiMarzio have grounds to bring legal action, or complaints to the bar association against that lawyer?
Unclear... The guy represents so many brands
You are a shill for Gibson.
Gibson already started selling double cream humbuckers a year or so ago, but they’re calling them “double classic white.” They only used them on ‘57 classics, and they sold out immediately. In your opinion, was this some kind of legal test? I know they filed to cancel DiMarzio’s trademark in 2023.
@@APMTenants yup we talked about that in a different video. Thanks for the comment.
@@blueslawyer thanks for the non-response. It would have been important to mention in the context of this episode. I’ll be sure to never check out the other episode
@@APMTenants I'm sorry you took offense to my response. I was just noting that we also noticed that. It's possible they were testing the waters for sure. Thanks for hanging out and leaving a comment.
@@APMTenants Good grief. Get the sand out of there already!😭
I don't think I want a Gibson anymore
@@BillySoundFarm that's up to you, but you could pivot to Dean versions
This is silly.
Silly is good.
Hate Gibson.
Another company riding the coattails of their betters.
Too many attorneys talking too much nonsense.
@@CKS64 in this case, the fact it was the same attorney for Dean and DiMarzio is the problem
Really Flying V Les Paul SG Mustang or whatever the shape of the guitar you're bitching about that's absolutely nothing to do with the sound fingerboard length what sizes a well cut nut a decent bridge and saddle pickups I really don't have to be the best pick up position can't help and you want to own a v forever why not a W and Z you are just the old Perrier water. If it wasn't for slash there would be no more Les Paul besides Rock and Roll is dead. What was the song rock and roll will never die. wooden saw the wood shaping and treatment and paint those have not much to do with the guitar there's plenty of new shapes you could go to and hold people off for at least 16 years
Gibberish
😂 What he freak are you getting at pal !?
Sorry, could you say that again ?