Are headstock shapes proprietary?

[Neil K Walk]

I don't know if it's because I've gotten tired of the traditional square headstocks but I've admired some of the curvier designs that mostly higher-end builders have put out. The closest factory approximation I can come up with are vintage Gibson and the current Epiphone Masterbilt headstock shapes. Are they considered to be trademarks or is it just the logo? If I were to emulate a headstock shape on an amateur build (but not the logo) would it be considered a copyright infringement?

[Chazmo]

That's a darn good question. I do wonder if anyone has actually tried to copyright or trademark a headstock shape. I doubt it.

The only real legal action I'd ever heard (and I don't even know if lawsuits were actually filed) goes back to the '70s when Japanese manufacturers were making nearly exact copies of the big American brands. Norlin (Gibson) went after Hoshino (Ibanez) at one time, but again I don't think any legal action actually resulted. I could be wrong.

Most of the American brands themselves have ripped each others' designs off anyway over time in various ways. It doesn't really seem like the business tries to make "shape" proprietary -- ultimately, of course, competition breeds more sales. I would imagine, however, that if headstock shape itself isn't trademarked, the manufacturers' logos probably are.

[gregsguitars]

Yes the headstock shapes are trademarked.

[Raggamuffin]

On a one-off amateur build I doubt you'd catch much grief. However, several years back Dan Lakin started building basses with headstocks that were very close in design/shape to those used by Fender. He had to tweak his headstock desgin to avoid legal issues with them.

[oldane]

Gibson actually has a design patent on their headstock design. When I ordered a Stromberg Master 400 copy from Jim Triggs this spring, he told me that he had to avoid the center dip (the moustache shape) on the top of the peghead because of this patent.

[arie]

I'd guess that if you are gonna make a one-off for around the house then go for it. If you are gonna make a bunch and then try to market/sell them then you should probably get real legal advice from a real patent attorney

I remember the Lakland basses. Pretty close to Fender territory.

[runamuck]

My understanding is that you can't copyright or patent a shape.

I'd like to see evidence to the contrary if I'm wrong.

Jim McCarthy

[Tim McKnight]

We, single builder shops, go to great lengths to design a headstock and bridge shape that is not the same as anyone else's. As you dig into this you will find how difficult that task really really is. It seems like it would be simple but its very tough to accomplish.

[gcalico]

If you try to sell shoes with a Nike swoosh or a soft drink with stylized lettering similar to Coca-Cola, you'll discover pretty quickly that shapes and stylized lettering can be copyright protected.

Design patents, as opposed to the more common utility patents, specifically cover the look of a product so, for example the glass Coke bottle could be covered by a design patent.

[HudsDad]

Originally Posted by runamuck

My understanding is that you can't copyright or patent a shape.

I'd like to see evidence to the contrary if I'm wrong.

Jim McCarthy

It's not a patent or copyright, but a trademark. Gibson has registered U.S. trademarks on at least two headstock shapes, along with several body shapes (Les Paul, Explorer, etc).

[Coke_zero]

Like Tim said, it must be so hard to find a unique headstock that hasn't been taken already. There's only so much people can change before it looks like someone elses again.

[walternewton]

Originally Posted by runamuck

My understanding is that you can't copyright or patent a shape.

I'd like to see evidence to the contrary if I'm wrong.

Jim McCarthy

Not patented or copyrighted, but trademarked, as noted above.

[Chazmo]

Originally Posted by Coke_zero

Like Tim said, it must be so hard to find a unique headstock that hasn't been taken already. There's only so much people can change before it looks like someone elses again.

And that's really the rub, right? Even given a trademark, in order to protect it you'd have to legally show that someone's design was really a violation. It's certainly not cut and dry.

Interesting about the Gibson liptop design patent. There've been many variations of the liptop from different vendors over the years. Gibson might send threatening letters to some vendor, as they did during the Clone Wars (), but is such a patent really defensible?

Of course, as everyone said, best to avoid it altogether and establish your own identity. But, as Tim mentioned and I'll paraphrase, there are only so many ways to skin a cat.

[Matt Mustapick]

There's too much petty tyranny on things like this. Too many people pretending that they've invented the guitar while they're essentially standing on the shoulders of C.F. Martin and Torres...making wild claims about about the dramatic benefits of how they've given these time-tested designs and shave and haircut, while at the same time decrying the original designs as unrefined, and to top it off, guarding their own recipes as if they were on to some magical secret.

In case it may ever be of interest, I'll be perfectly happy to give you the details on anything I do so that you can copy anything you like.

[SMan]

I would guess that just about every headstock shape has been tried by someone.

Yeah, I built a electric guitar kit and the headstock probably violates a popular patent...........Guess I'll sit and wait for a knock on the door.....