Rickenbacker and trademarks

[tauzero]

While trying to find out what trademark legislation might apply to Rickenbackers and copies in the UK, I happened across [url="http://www.rickenbacker.com/model.asp?model=660/12"]this description[/url] on Rickenbacker's website. What made me curious was that they refer to 'Rickenbacker's trademark "checkered" black and white binding'. Now I know that, at least in the US, there is trademark on the headstock and body shapes, and RIC is obliged to pursue breaches of that trademark in the US otherwise they stand to lose it, but is the chequered binding really a trademark or are Rickenbacker using the term in a rather less than strict legal context?

[vax2002]

Not a lot of what they claim would stand up in court, hence why they use threats so harshly.
They put the wind in to people, even groups like this.
Which has lead a lot of folk to question if that is the sort of company you want to buy products from, one that thinks it owns the words out of peoples mouths now !

[simon1964]

[quote name='tauzero' timestamp='1334482788' post='1616607']
While trying to find out what trademark legislation might apply to Rickenbackers and copies in the UK, I happened across [url="http://www.rickenbacker.com/model.asp?model=660/12"]this description[/url] on Rickenbacker's website. What made me curious was that they refer to 'Rickenbacker's trademark "checkered" black and white binding'. Now I know that, at least in the US, there is trademark on the headstock and body shapes, and RIC is obliged to pursue breaches of that trademark in the US otherwise they stand to lose it, but is the chequered binding really a trademark or are Rickenbacker using the term in a rather less than strict legal context?
[/quote]

To be fair, I don't read that as meaning trademark in the legal sense. I think they simply mean it in the sense that a guitarist could have a "trademark" riff, or David Beckham taking a "trademark" free kick. But it is an ironic choice of words given their reputation.

[waynepunkdude]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1334483122' post='1616609']
OOps they have trademarked Checks.

Waynes gonna get a letter
[/quote]

And they'll get a 2 word one back.

[tauzero]

I've just emailed them to ask..

[quote]
I noticed in your description of the 660 that you refer to the "trademark checkered binding". I understand that the headstock and body shapes are trademarked, but is this chequered binding actually a trademark?

Regards
[/quote]

[Beer of the Bass]

Chequered binding doesn't seem to crop up in the usual luthiers binding/purfling sources, so perhaps Ric do have some kind of "trade dress" protection going on, like Dimarzio do with cream coloured humbuckers. It could be a tough one to protect though, as I'm sure some of the older Martin guitars had something similar.
EDIT: I did a quick google search, and there are open online sources of very similar checkered purfling, so maybe not.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Beer of the Bass

[phatkat]

[i]They certainly have e-bay under control... I tried to sell a ric copy on ebay a couple of years back and the add was pulled down about 4 times even with no use of the word richenbacker in the auction. I also got a fairly harshly worded email from rickenbacker which pissed me off as ebay must have furnished them with my email address.[/i]
[i]In the end one of the bidders managed to contact me and we did the deal.[/i]

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1334558953' post='1617447']
I know I'm in the minority here so I'll keep this short, but I applaud Rickenbacker for protecting their interests.
I think there may be a few might agree, but sight the CEO's methods as bully boy tactics.
Well, you know what, I bet he's sick to the back teeth of asking nicely and there comes a point when pretty please don't work anymore.
If you want to manufacture a bass in a far eastern place (other points of the compass available on request) then go design your own original shape and see how many you sell!
[/quote]

Of course he's entitled to, but he should focus his efforts on the manufacturers and importers who are profiting from it, not the little guys.

[Musky]

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1334558953' post='1617447']
I know I'm in the minority here so I'll keep this short, but I applaud Rickenbacker for protecting their interests.
I think there may be a few might agree, but sight the CEO's methods as bully boy tactics.
Well, you know what, I bet he's sick to the back teeth of asking nicely and there comes a point when pretty please don't work anymore.
If you want to manufacture a bass in a far eastern place (other points of the compass available on request) then go design your own original shape and see how many you sell!
[/quote]
I've got to agree with you there. Despite it's high profile RIC is a small, essentially family business, not a huge corporation like FMIC for instance.

However what raises people hackles is the way JH pursues private sellers of instruments that existed well before RIC even applied for a trademark. It isn't a case of "how many you sell" if you're just trying to move on a personally owned instrument. Despite what JH and the Rickenwaffen would have us believe, it's not illegal to sell personal property in this way in the UK. So to make baseless threats to sellers certainly does smack of bully boy tactics. I really can't see that the sale of a 35 year old copy, for a fraction of the price of even a used Rick, really threatens the sale of RIC's new instruments.

[charic]

[quote name='waynepunkdude' timestamp='1334484572' post='1616639']
And they'll get a 2 word one back.
[/quote]

I'm Sorry?

[Stacker]

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1334560089' post='1617453']
Of course he's entitled to, but he should focus his efforts on the manufacturers and importers who are profiting from it, not the little guys.
[/quote]

+1

[Kiwi]

We've sought legal advice which suggests the matter is less clear cut than has been suggested in this thread.

[phatkat]

[quote name='Musky' timestamp='1334560704' post='1617461']
I've got to agree with you there. Despite it's high profile RIC is a small, essentially family business, not a huge corporation like FMIC for instance.

However what raises people hackles is the way JH pursues private sellers of instruments that existed well before RIC even applied for a trademark. It isn't a case of "how many you sell" if you're just trying to move on a personally owned instrument. Despite what JH and the Rickenwaffen would have us believe, it's not illegal to sell personal property in this way in the UK. So to make baseless threats to sellers certainly does smack of bully boy tactics. I really can't see that the sale of a 35 year old copy, for a fraction of the price of even a used Rick, really threatens the sale of RIC's new instruments.
[/quote]

Nicely said...

[Stacker]

I was just about to go lurking on Castle Rickenwaffen and I mistyped the name and [url="http://www.ricresource.com/ct1/home.html"]this[/url] came up!! Got the RIC name up there, JH!!

Actually, JH might do well to engage with that group......

[Stacker]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1334574507' post='1617745']
For me the telling thing is this. Small companies like the Birch and Prosbass get hammered because they can't afford a legal battle and stop, looking like RIC is winning the battle.

BUT Bigger firms like Shine, Rockinbetter, Dillion in Canada somehow manage to carry on regardless. If JH had any real teeth how come they still continue?

How come he hasn't followed through with the threats he dishes out to smaller firms and private sellers and wiped out these mass producing companies.
[/quote]

Maybe he's afraid of a protracted legal case? Being a small firm, who knows how deep their coffers are?

Edited April 16, 2012 by Stacker

[waynepunkdude]

I have a friend who is a copyright solicitor looking into this ATM.

[vax2002]

I think what the problem is, that the basses can be re-produced at a fraction of his selling price, thats the threat, they use cnc machinery like anyone else does, but still charge hand made prices, so you can see why they need to guard the front gate so meaninglessly.

[waynepunkdude]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1334577147' post='1617815']
you thinking of having some built too
[/quote]

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1334574507' post='1617745']
BUT Bigger firms like Shine, Rockinbetter, Dillion in Canada somehow manage to carry on regardless. If JH had any real teeth how come they still continue?

How come he hasn't followed through with the threats he dishes out to smaller firms and private sellers and wiped out these mass producing companies.
[/quote]

Problem is probably being in Europe vs. not, since there is retarded amounts of legislation where the EU sucks up to the US regarding homogenising copyright law, the not clear cut mentioned earlier will be the fact this bloated sort of legislation needs to be tested in the higher courts before you can even consider a definitive answer as some sort of precedent needs to be set.

Ideal thing to do is everyone have a rickenfaker for sale on your personal website, fairly low key but there, and should Mr Hall try and claim he has pursued his copyright with regards to individual sellers aggressively later, we can cite all of them of examples that he hasn't, and has instead lazily gone to various bigger players like ebay and basschat and demanded they do his job for him. Also stop using Ricks, they really aren't very well made.

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1334577147' post='1617815']
you thinking of having some built too
[/quote]

If anyone is on this, pm me, I'm interested.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Mr. Foxen

[waynepunkdude]

Nothing worse than having to pull out when you're really close....

[waynepunkdude]

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1334585303' post='1618003']
Say that at 4 in the morning 9 months after you didn't pull out
[/quote]

I got sued when I pulled out, apparently John Hall had copyrighted the shape of the end of mine

[charic]

[quote name='waynepunkdude' timestamp='1334585930' post='1618023']
I got sued when I pulled out, apparently John Hall had copyrighted the shape of the end of mine
[/quote]

Are you saying that John Hall has copyrighted being a bell-end?

[Kiwi]

[quote name='waynepunkdude' timestamp='1334576576' post='1617801']
I have a friend who is a copyright solicitor looking into this ATM.
[/quote]
Thanks Wayne, I gather a long standing basschat member is a copyright lawyer as well although haven't heard from him yet.

I'd be interested to see how much consistency there is between legal opinions. Our initial advice was that this is a grey area and the forum has an obligation to work in good faith with John Hall, [i]especially[/i] in the presence of grey areas.

I would prefer the forum avoids attracting legal costs, but it goes without saying that the membership is free to make up their own minds up about John Hall's claim.

[GregBass]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1334578470' post='1617858']
Also stop using Ricks, they really aren't very well made.

[/quote]

I find it strange that you guys keep saying this. I have had two Ricks - I still have one, in fact - and they are the best made basses I have ever had. They certainly kick my Fender and Warwicks into the long grass in terms of build quality!!

[vax2002]

Why does your Warwick and fenders have a middle pick up that looks like a chromed tobacco tin attacked with tin snips.....

Edited April 17, 2012 by vax2002