Fender’s lawyers go to war!

jp_nyc

jp_nyc

Kick Henry Jackassowski
Remember a few months back when Fender won a copyright lawsuit in Germany? Now Fender is now sending C&D orders to small guitar builders in the USA demanding that they halt production of Stratocaster shaped guitars. Will they stop with the little guys or keep pushing until Paul Reed Smith pushes back?
 
So, so similar to Gibson in the fact that they also could have a LOT less competition from folks making strat products if they would have better QC.

The only guitar I've ever had that needed a general fret leveling straight out of the box was my Fender, and I've owned some seriously cheeaap guitars.
 
In a financialized economy, if you’re not actively in finance or maybe risk/insurance, then you’re in the intellectual property business.

I’ve had my grubby hands on a lot of guitars over the last 6 months of seriously high end guitar shopping. There nothing really separating Fender products from their peers beyond proprietary aesthetic details and some minor personal preference type variations in pickup character, neck carve, and fret size.

So yeah, I guess it “makes sense” to do this from a business/market perspective. Probably ads more value to their company vs. making the world’s greatest bolt on a the worlds bestest price point. Guess that G&L acquisition makes more sense now.
 
Last edited:
The gear page.net is full of balanced, reasoned takes (/s).

I don't know how the heck I feel about this tbh. I mean, yeah, they designed the body and should be able to protect it. But, that was like 70 years ago and it's a little late to shut the barn door after the house.

I am kinda in the market for a Strat with a maple fretboard. I'd like to not get a Fender, but the options in my area for anything with maple are hard to find.
 
They haven't protected their patent for decades, is someone fights this, they will lose on those grounds.
 
I’ve always been a proud Fender owner, at least partially because they weren’t litigious dicks like Gibson. This bums me out.
 
The law is only potentially in their favor outside of the US.

I find the inconsistencies of the IP and copyright law to be fascinating and frustrating. Current US copyright ownership is life of the creator plus 75 years. Applying this logic to Leo and his death in 1991, all of his designs at Fender should still be exclusively Fender's until 2066. That said, we know that Gibson, Fender, and many others failed to file complete copy of the designs for instruments and components. It's safe to assume that the sale of Fender transferred ownership to CBS and then FMIC, so I don't know how that affects copyright, patents, and trademarks.

Given the lack of uniform international copyright laws, I'm not sure how well founded the Fender case is in and across Europe. All of this would be before factoring in how it would impact the manufacture of instruments for various European companies (and those in other countries) that outsource manufacturing to Japan, Korea, Indonesia, China, etc.

It's an ugly bit of business, especially the insane notion of recalling instruments and destroying them (the recalls and unsold inventory). I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that the least shitty option would be to request and/or sue for licensing royalties. Let them make and sell the guitars, instead of potentially ending people's livelihood and destroying useable instruments.

I'm a Fender/Fender-style fan, they are the instruments I'm most comfortable playing, but I won't be buying any new gear from them again if they continue pursuing this, or likely at all regardless. While it may be their legal right to pursue these claims, it is also my right to look elsewhere for gear needs/wants.
 
Just go over it in my head, I haven't bought a Fender product since 2012, when I bought a Mustang 1 amp. Prior to that it was my Blues DeVille around '94, MIJ '69 Thinline Tele in the early mid-'90s, and my '92 Am Std Strat. Still want a good classic style Tele, but (again) it won't be new from Fender.

Rethinking it, the Thinline may have been after the DeVille...cuz I know y'all care deeply.

Cheers
 
My last and only new Fender (other than a cheap Squier 15 yrs ago) was a Player II Tele a couple yrs back, when I was frustrated with the disheveled state of my partscaster at the time.
Now that I have the partscaster sorted, it turned into a kinda unnecessary purchase, but it's a decent guitar.
Def won't be purchasing another new Fender in the foreseeable future because why support a lazy ass greedy monopoly seeking corp?
I just bought a Strat, but it's a 1996 Mexican :) edit: its a 96'
 
Last edited:
RDT_20260519_1912445849622923905198177.png
 
BrammyH said:
The gear page.net is full of balanced, reasoned takes (/s).

I don't know how the heck I feel about this tbh. I mean, yeah, they designed the body and should be able to protect it. But, that was like 70 years ago and it's a little late to shut the barn door after the house.

I am kinda in the market for a Strat with a maple fretboard. I'd like to not get a Fender, but the options in my area for anything with maple are hard to find.
Click to expand...
 
I'm sort of meh on this. I've only ever owned Fender/Squier or Gibson/Epi in terms of electric guitars (I've played other brands but never bought one). There are plenty of ways to slightly modify a body shape to make it not be an exact strat copy (see ESP's very slight variation on a Les Paul), but it seems odd at this time that Fender decided to go after something people have been doing for years. Maybe those PRS Silver Sky guitars hit a nerve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top