Fender, the orange guy of guitarbrands?

The management consultant vultures and MBA types* just don't seem capable of running a business that just...sells a product people love. There's always an acquisition to make, a new market to expand into, bonuses to dole out to the c-suite, etc. And when every exec is just a slight variation on the same finance/tech-pilled doofus in a vest, every company turns into the same cynical value-extraction machine.

One of the saddest parts is that they've done it twice now. CBS bought them in 1965 and quality went down hill fast. A group of Fender employees then bought it from CBS in the mid '80s and busted their asses to right the ship and put out quality products again, and least for the Fullerton guitars.

It's the enshittification cycle of capitalism*. Somebody makes a name for themselves by developing a high-quality product that the public establishes a track record of paying good money for. Then a group of douchebags from Connecticut notices all that money flowing into the company and they buy it up for the name and good will... knowing it will be a long time before the general public notices their only plan to improve the bottom line is to decrease expenses by sacrificing quality.


*the worst economic system there is, except for all the others.
 
Watch Phil from Know your Gear, he goes into the details of everything.

In the US, the strat body is public domain, but the headstock is not. Warmoth has a licensing agreement with Fender to sell their headstock shape, but there is no restriction on the body.

In Germany, they have recently ruled that the Strat body shape is protected and not to be copied by other companies. The ruling happened by default when Fender brought a suit against a Chinese company and the other party failed to show up to defend their case. Now, the law firm that Fender used is stating this case is precedence to go after every other company that sells non Fender branded strat shape guitars.

If one or more of those companies defended themselves in court I'm sure it wouldn't end well for Fender. Their precedence argument is weak and the rest of their argument is based around their claims that the Strat body being a form of art, which it isn't.
Precedent system only applies to US law as far as I know. It’s not a thing in Europe. Please correct me.
 
My two most recent guitars are partscasters and I will never go back.

The bodies are from a small builder, custom routed to my specs with an unusual bridge configuration not offered by Fender (Jaguar tremolo on a Mustang body), and they are identical in shape/compatible with all parts from the original Mustang. Nitro finish from another one-man shop. Pickups from a boutique builder that sound better than anything on a stock Fender. Custom pickguard shape from another small business, etc.
This is the way…provided you really know what you want because you’re selling that glorious mutant at a loss if you end up not liking it.

My version is a thinline tele with PAFs and a random eBay neck. Nobody’s ever buying that thing but hell if it isn’t perfect for me. Even with a less than perfect fret job by yours truly it still plays better than damn near anything I’ve picked up since.
 
Precedent system only applies to US law as far as I know. It’s not a thing in Europe. Please correct me.

The countries that came from England, (e.g., US, Canada, Australia,*) are predominantly common-law countries, meaning that previous court decisions by higher courts set binding precedent. Most of Europe is civil-law countries, meaning that the courts primary method of deriving the law is looking at the statutes themselves. In the real world, they do look to see what other judges have done when presented with the same issues... they're just more free to say to themselves, "That other judge was a moron," and decide something completely different.

Fun fact: Louisiana is the only civil-law US state... but that only applies to matters of state law, not federal.

*I think the entirety of the UK is still common law too.
 
Just to play devils advocate, I took a look at the LSL Guitars and both their S and T style headstock shapes are the closest I've seen to an actual Fender. Maybe it was just a little too close and with the body and features so close as well, it hit a lawyer trigger
Absolutely, the tele especially.
 
It's worth noting that the respondent didn't show up or offer arguments in the Düsseldorf ruling. The Aliexpress seller just chose to leave the marketplace, rather than pay to argue the merits in court. That's probably what Fender hopes most of the recipients do.

Since (as said above) there's no binding precedent doctrine, each would have to lawyer up individually, or else stop making strats. That seemed weird (having grown up in Louisiana), so I looked it up and European courts have a variety of ways to bundle similar cases. The Düsseldorf regional court apparently hears a majority of patent law cases, and they would probably reverse their previous ruling after hearing both sides.

So maybe Fender is hoping to scare away some "competitors," partly by threatening to narrow their ability to join cases or get/use "model declaratory actions," etc. In Louisiana, which (as said above) has some elements of European law, a good attorney would say up front: "if they stop you from joining a defendant class because your case is too different, you're going to have to do your own trial."

That's shitty. But IMHO the reality is that mainstream consumers worldwide would say that the traditional Fender shapes are the most desirable, and that genuine Fender guitars have the most status among those shapes. Fender can spend a little on marketing and come out ahead, as far as the masses and their buying tendencies are concerned.

Edit: here's a good breakdown from Yamaha
 
Last edited:
I understand the need for a catchy article title to get clicks, but if everyone is constantly being hyperbolic to get attention, words stop meaning things, and we all loose our sense of proportion.

This is classic MBA level villainy—and not even the worst case of it in the last few years. It's greedy and ill advised, but it's nothing like what I'd expect from Lex Luthor or Golfinger.
 
I feel like they have a right to protect their brand. It’s ludicrous at this point, but it’s within their right. What I don’t understand is why Strat and not the rest of their body shapes?
 
I feel like they have a right to protect their brand. It’s ludicrous at this point, but it’s within their right. What I don’t understand is why Strat and not the rest of their body shapes?

Because the lawyers think it's the easiest case to make. If they succeed here, you can be sure they'll move on to Teles and their offsets.

There's a legal concept that you lose your rights if you sleep on them too long. It's fundamentally unfair to allow people to build businesses for decades without objecting and then rugpull them. If Fender didn't like it, they should have spoken up long ago.
 
Back
Top