http://news.harmony-central.com/News/2004/Gibson-PRS-Case.html
Wonder if even the cheap korean ones will become *collector's items* now.
Kerry M
I have kind of a mixed feelings thingy... :) On one hand ripping off (if that really is the case is by all means wrong, but then, on the other hand it's another victory for big corps. against small (PRS ain't that big... ) buisnesses...
It's too late... I'm tired for that moral dilema...
Fact: the single-cut PRS *is* a lespaul, but with slightly different dimensions. The lower horn is really different, and almost all other shapes and sizes differ at least slightly.
Fact: If looked at that way, a PRS is essentially a double-cut LPjunior with a top curved ala the regular LP.
Fact: single-cut guitars are common ground.
Fact: Teles, guitars made by possibly Gibson's greatest adversary, are single-cut.
Fact: both Gibson themselves (Epi) and a plethora of manufacturers make plain-as-day *direct* copies of LesPauls. Gibson do nothing about this, aside from prohibiting the use of the name, which PRS wasn't doing anyway.
Fact: there is a very real possibility the PRS is just plain better.
Is this suit bogus or what?
Next you know they can't make guitars anymore 'cause they worked with McCarty and G claim the rights to him as well.
(I wonder if this post will be the final death of my half-n-half job offer at Gibson ;p )
i thought there was some kind of precidance that you can't copyright a body shape...
now is fender gunna sue every single company that makes strat copies?
aka. yamaha, ibanez, and countless other small companies.
do they all pay fender ?
Geez, this kinda crap just ticks me off to no end! PRS has really nice gutiars (no, I dont own one, but I've played many), so they get picked on by the bigger companies. I believe Fender just LOST the very same case, where they were trying to get compensation for "copies" of the Fender Stratocaster. In fact, they actually did have a suit in the late '60's or early '70's that they won, based only on the headstock of their guitar. The suit stated that, although the body could not be trademarked, the headstock was a defining Fender trademark and any manufacturers of these guitars with "copycat" headstocks could be sued for damages. (Ibanez and Decca among others.) Dont get me wrong, I think that innovation in guitar designs is a wonderful thing, but PRS's single cutaway is no more a "copy" of the Les Paul than EXP's singly cutaway. There are subtle differences that may in fact make a HUGE tonal difference. Just for kicks, I'd like to load a PRS single cutaway with Les Paul 'buckers and hear it for myself.
EDIT: I wonder... If I built a guitar to exacting body specifications of a Les Paul, only I used aircraft aluminum instead of wood, would Gibson have a case? Sure it would look like a Les Paul, but I dont think anyone could say that the end result would sound remotely like one. Just food for thought.
That's too bad....'cause PRS are, most of the time, way better than stock Pauls...
This reminded me of another lawsuit, about 5 years ago, where Apple sued another company (eMachine, I think) for building a computer really similar to their new release iMac....actually, the lost.
that's just crap that the body shape would "cause confusion in the marketplace". Any guitarists can tell b/w a les paul and PRS, take a look at the headstock for a start, not to mention the trem!
I may be the only one who feels this way, but I HATE PRS. I used to work for the 3rd largest dealer in the nation and couldn't stand them. I haven't played two I cared for (I played a Hollowbody I I somewhat liked). The necks feel like twigs and the tone is really not my thing.
BUT, I have to say that the lawsuit was fairly ungrounded, especially if you look at all the other companies that are in the same boat, and I don't really agree with it. To me, the LP and the single-cut are two different guitars, both in feel and look and definitely tone. I've got mixed emotions about this, but overall I'd have to disagree with it, even though I have such bad feelings for PRS.
see, the problem with saying is that they have different feal or tone is that the jury knows nothing about tone or feal. A guitar is a guitar. And thats a problem with our legal system...
Amen to the comment about the legal system. You really cannot ask people who know nothing about guitars to rule on that type of case. Anyone who is looking to spend that much money on an instrument is going to know the difference between a PRS and a Paul.
Personally, I think PRS is a huge sellout, and they piss me off, but Gibson was totally out of line to do such a thing. It's really a shame that they have to increase their profit by cutting down the competition rather than improving on their product.
Has nothing to do with coolness IMO. Not at all.
When who wins 'the' game is determined by who can muster the largest load of 'legal poker' chips, or hold out the longest...WE suffer.
All the time and energy that could have been put into updating luthier tools, or working on new designs that WE might have benefitted from is sucked into the 'legal vortex'...SAD.
Maybe there are enough guitar to go around, so building a better one is less of a proirity, attacking your competition is more of priority.
PRS was making as Les Pauley looking guitars as they are now, ten years ago...not as much capitol for the wolves I guess. I haven't followed this case so I'm probably off base here on 'timetables'...didn't hondo and many other [less lucrative to persure legalsuit-wise] do exactly the same thing?...copy LP's.
Being an owner of both I can honestly say that my PRS is so much more of a players guitar. It is effortless to play, made to be played, and it has spoiled me. My LP doesn't get out of the case as much as it used to.
I'ts a 90's LP so I can't speak for the previous four decades of LP's when I think Gibson actually cared what went out the door, maybe they still do I don't know.
Just my .02 Jered
I thought this suit was terrible.
Unbelievable ramifications for the entire guitar industry I would think.
Reminds me of what Ronald Regan did with Harley Davidson. Government steps in and protects a company that's not doing any foward thinking or research, and pockets the profits while turning out the same old crap.
I was just wondering to what extent this has to do with the PRS attempt to essentially co-opt the Gibson tradition via Ted McCarty. Probably more to do with how much market share there is for $3000 list guitars. I was just in the market for a *Gibson Style* guitar ( for my purposes this mostly meant mahogany body/neck and two humbuckers with a tune-o-matic style bridge and more likely a 24 3/4" scale). I played a LOT of guitars in this general style over a two day period and seriously considered a really nice emerald green PRS single-cut (used) . The thing was just too damned heavy for me and I had started thinking I really wanted the *genuine* Gibson scale length and the intonation adjustment of a tune-o-matic. The scale length and bridge are what became the *Gibson* defining factors for me. The guitar I ended up falling in love with was a 93' Les Paul Studio about 1-2 pounds lighter and less than half the cost of the PRS. I guess that's why I think it's a shame Gibson felt the need to pursue this legally. I was ready to spend more than twice as much on a guitar that *looked* like a Les Paul and has a higher build quality than the guitar I bought. I wanted a Gibson and that's what I got. The similar body shape and superior build quality were not enough to *fool* me into buying a PRS :lol: I'd have a dozen each of PRS single-cuts and Les Pauls if I could.
The Judge wrote a 50-something page decision in this case. I wonder if that will be available online in some form. That would make for hours of read-and-discuss fun!
Kerry M
I wonder if PRS is going to sue Gibson for their Les Paul DC :wink:
personally - I think this is BS..
first off, I think PRS makes a far better guitar than Gibson does, but that's why there are so many, they all appeal to different players.
Fret - this is not at all comparable to HD.. which was not saved by the government, but bought back by the Davidson family.. oh yeah, and they were the Fortune company of the year last year, so they can't be too bad (I have a Harley, and for all the 'lack of forward thinking' - it's still the best bike on the road by a long shot.. unless you like sportbikes, but that's another animal altogether)
"-)
I agree on the PRS issue Mark. Maybe the H-D was a bad analogy. My BAC was over the legal and intellectual limits for typing when I posted! This morning I woke up waiting to get hammered for it! But they did get the help of the tariff on the imports, and a pretty good infusion of Govt. cash if I remember right. And they did bounce back like gangbusters. Yes, I'm a sportbike (cafe) man. Went from motocross in my teens right to Keith Code superbike school to the street. But as long as you ride, and enjoy the open road, it doesnt matter what brand you have. Well, as long as it doesnt say Vespa on the side!
Probably still a bad analogy, but I guess my point was that a company is increasing it's market share because of an external restraint imposed on a competitor. With it's increased share and lack of competition, what will Gibson do? Give us better finishes, better overall quality control, better hardware, or pots that actually are 500k instead of 300k? Doubt it.
By the end of the seventies, Fender and Gibson were giving us poor quality until the better clones caught them with their pants down. That kind of competition is healthy.
yeah - I get exactly what you mean..
the only Fender or Gibson products I've ever owned are a '66 Mustang that I refurbished, and a '68 Bassman head...
I can't play LPs.. they just don't work for me. I'd like a nice strat someday, but I keep finding guitars that I like better (even some strat clones).
"-)
So what are you riding these days?
this is my baby:
http://mark.warcode.com/harley.cfm
Nice ride Mark! That's some serious steel there!
I sold my FJ1200 and kept my middleweight. As I got older, I decided I wanted to live a little longer. I've never been much of a commuter. I just head out into the country and go WFO! My riding style never changed, so something was going to give eventually. With time, most of my crew quit riding. It's still fun now and then. The GPZ still handles great!
http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/mw252001/detail?.dir=/9ef1&.dnm=71ac.jpg
Not an LP man either. I have a LP clone, but prefer the Strats. I did get lucky and bought a "Smith Strat" when they came out. A real brief period where Fender got it together quality wise coming off the seventies.
http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/mw252001/album?.dir=/82%27+Smith+Strat
Very nice (on both items!)
I'm not much of a commuter either.. I love to head down to the keys, or up A1A along the ocean.. just cruising.. slow & low.
"-)
Thanks. Those both sound like wicked senic routes. For me, it's up to the Adirondacks, especially in the fall. Funny, when I think of riding in Florida, I always think of geriatric blue-hairs pulling out in front of me every block. Soon, that older generation that never recognised bikes as legitimate vehicles of the road will be gone. Thank God!
You must have hit bike week. One of my co-workers brought back some videos. :D :twisted: He had a video of a demolition derby with bikes! I thought I was a maniac! These freaks were bouncing off each other with old bikes like Honda CB 400's. Shorts, with no helmets!! They were just circling around T-boning each other!
I guess we're way off topic. Where were we...? Oh yes...Gibson legally sodomized PRS. What's that do to the dealers? No benefit for consumers. Gibson shareholders will like it.
Typical USA corporate attitude is it not?