Author Topic: Dragon Inlay Copyrighted by PRS? (Read 397 times)

jleague · « **on:** August 14, 2003, 08:07:59 PM »

I'm a member of the PRS forum, not because I really care for PRS guitars, but because I've found out about so many great small builders from that forum. Someone posted a picture of an Alembic custom, I think it was Dragon Magic, the guitar with the Dragon fingerboard inlay. Well, per the usual, a big-time PRS collector who is afraid of anything that could be better than the machine-built overpriced PRS Private Stocks, and who also is apparently close to Paul, entered the discussion and said that PRS had a copyright on the use of all dragon inlays on fingerboards. I was wondering if this is true and if Alembic has stopped offering this option or if PRS has contacted Alembic about this purported copyright? Or if this is all the result of reactionary envy based on the (okay, IMO) obvious superiority of Alembic instruments? I'm really interested to know how all of these types of things work in the industry, so any info from Mica or another forumite here would be greatly appreciated!

thrill74 · « **Reply #1 on:** August 14, 2003, 10:03:36 PM »

I?ve been following this post on the PRS Forum since it started and have this to say. I think that the copyright covers PRS?s version of the dragon, in the same spot on the fret board with same inlay. Alembic?s dragon on that particular guitar looks nothing like the PRS dragon. If a customer wanted another dragon inlay on an Alembic it would have to be different from PRS, true. But, Alembic is a totally custom shop and if I wanted to put a dragon climbing on my pickups and throwing goats down the fret board then Mica or Susan would probably ask what material I wanted it done in. As long as it wasn?t the PRS dragon.
World Class Guitars used to offer flying birds on their guitars (no secret right?). PRS?s copyright on the birds shut that off for every manufacturer. WCG can fully, legally, do a ?winged serpent? inlay though. It looks better and is done with better material and is slightly different, but it?s still a dragon. It?s even in the same spot. I don?t think PRS has the ?no dragon whatsoever anywhere in any form on a guitar? copyright. I believe it?s the ?one else can have a dragon on the fret board, in the same way PRS does and call it a dragon? copyright. That guitar they are looking at is a Series 1 model with custom dragon inlay. Not a dragon model or limited production. The way I see it, as long as they aren?t selling it as a ?dragon? model, with the PRS dragon on it, then it isn?t even remotely infringing on PRS?s copyrights.

valvil · « **Reply #2 on:** August 14, 2003, 10:05:02 PM »

I may be wrong, but from my knowledge of copyright law (which does have more than a few holes in it) I don't see how that could be true. I do not believe you can copyright something as undefined & vague as all dragon inlays on instrument fretboards. You can copyright a specific Dragon Inlay design , but not all of them (including ones people haven't designed yet); if you tried, I bet the folks at the copyright office would laugh at you; besides, Alembic's been making dragons for 30 years or so, well before PRS started his own company. And Alembic still offers the dragon option (actually there are at least 2 different Alembic dragon designs) This is kinda comparable to Al Franken being sued by Fox News for using the words fair and balanced in his book title. What will they try to copyright next...

I believe your reactionary envy theory is probably accurate. When I worked in a music store I ran into many self-proclaimed experts in one guitar company or another who made really bizarre or preposterous claims about this guitar or that guitar; mostly they had it all wrong, and looked quite silly when you went to the company's website and showed them that the 100% accurate information they had was 100 % wrong. These folks just could not stand the idea that their favorite instrument might be less than the end-all and be-all of the guitar kingdom.

My 2 cents

Valentino

thrill74 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 14, 2003, 10:32:05 PM »

On the bottom of PRS's web page on almost all of the pages it reads: 'Dragon', and the designs for the Dragon I, Dragon II, Dragon III and Dragon 2000 guitars are all registered trademarks of Paul Reed Smith Guitars. 'Private Stock, SE, and the Dragon 2002 design are all trademarks of Paul Reed Smith Guitars. So only remakes of those particular dragons apply. And I looked again on the WCG site and the head is turned to the far right. A little different but very similar. Just not exact.

dean_m · « **Reply #4 on:** August 15, 2003, 07:30:04 AM »

It seems to me that PRS has more trademarks and copywrites than it does guitars.
They do make some beautiful guitars that's for sure but... they also make some overseas guitars that aren't so cool too. I think it's funny when a company who puts so much effort into designing and building such beautiful guitars resorts to overseas building to fill a price point(ie. sell more guitars). It kinda dilutes the wine so to speak. Anyhow, wasn't Alembic one of the first companies to put the beautiful dragon inlays on basses and guitars? Kinda ironic who should be holding the copywrite huh?
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I applaud Ron, Susan and Mica and everyone at Alembic for not resorting to what so many other custom builders have done so to fill a price point.

Just my 2 cents too!!!!

Peace,
D

dannobasso · « **Reply #5 on:** August 15, 2003, 07:56:01 AM »

I have a MOP Dragon inlay on a quilted maple/purpleheart Spoiler 6 made in 86. When I first saw a PRS dragon I found it quite similar to the Alembic design. Does Mr. Smith know that car companies have been using his SE trademark for years without paying him anything? I had a 88 Pontiac SE and I hadn't even heard of PRS back then.
I did have my dragon though! Did he trademark Carlos Santana and Mark Tremonti TOO? Is guitar trademarked as well?
(thinking this is a bit silly)
Danno

elzie · « **Reply #6 on:** August 15, 2003, 09:12:35 AM »

Danno, Microsoft used SE too, in Win98 SE. Now there's some deep pockets to sue for infringement.....LOL

thrill74 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 15, 2003, 11:50:20 AM »

Mr. Smith has the scoop trademarked in any way or form on all his guitars. This copyright is like the flying birds design. Nowhere on any guitar even remotely resembling PRS. A reversed scoop is totally acceptable though. A fat pigeon sitting on a branch is acceptable. Is this making sense? The pigeon is okay cause it's not flying? It just doesn't hold up.

mikedm · « **Reply #8 on:** August 15, 2003, 01:51:03 PM »

In my field we run up against copyright issues all the time. Some make perfect sense; some take a bit of pondering to discerne. It's amazing what you can get a copy right on. Yes, you can copyright an idea. Some medical researchers have done just that to prevent another firm from taking the next leap and capitalizing on their work. Sound pretty bogus to me, but with the right lawyer you can get anything done.
Saddly, you can loose your ass if you step on the toes of an inhospitable holder, however innocent (or ignorant) your intentions may be.
As musicians, and performing ones at that, you cross that particular line every time you play at a club and get paid. It's too hard to enforce so nobody bothers, although I know of one case where a record rep happened to be in a bar, in a bad mood, and threatened to file suit against the band and the club owner.
I'm not defending Mr. PRS, or holders of other seemingly bizzare copyrights, but his dragons are nice works of art and as an artist I'd copyright the bejesus out of them too. And as musicians, if you come up a pretty cool lick and flesh out a song: record it and copyright it.

All that said, I'd still prefer a dragon designed and crafted by the fine folks at Alembic.

adios,
Mike

kipknee · « **Reply #9 on:** August 19, 2003, 08:47:22 AM »

If you want to read about ridiculous lawsuits regarding copyright infringement, take a look at the following web page: http://www.madmartian.com/legal

This involves a lawsuit by Monster Cable against a company that makes monster masks (as in, for halloween). Apparently Monster Cable has a very aggressive legal department and they sue anybody that uses the word monster in their advertising.

After reading this a few months ago, I no longer buy any more products from Monster Cable. Even though the two parties have come to an agreement, it still shows a pretty accurate view of the ethics of Monster Cable.

Bob

adriaan · « **Reply #10 on:** August 19, 2003, 11:02:05 PM »

I'm not a trademark lawyer, but I happen to know a thing or two about this, so if you're looking for a nice sedative feast your eyes on this:

Under trademark law you can get protection for your brand names, product names, logos, designs, etc., etc. The general term for this is 'intellectual property'. When you apply for registration of a trademark in a country, you claim the right for the exclusive use in certain product classes in that country.

It is up to the trademark office to decide if your claim is valid for all classes. Mind you, these classes have a peculiar history: they correspond to sections of the ground plan of the first 19th century World Fair, and so they make for some strange bedmates.

There should also be a check if the trademark is not a generic term. They missed that one when Microsoft registered Windows.

There are certain things you cannot claim rights to, and sometimes exceptions are made. For instance, you can build and sell an instrument with a Fender-style body, as long as you do not use the Fender-style headstock - unless you get a license from Fender to do so. Like with Music Man and the cheap OLP copies, which stands for Officially Licensed Product.

You can go to sleep now.

jake · « **Reply #11 on:** August 30, 2003, 10:12:35 PM »

steve helgeson [moonstone guitars] was the first ever to inlay birds as position markers on a guitar. When prs tried to sue him he showed them a guitar he built before prs started using birds. tony zemaitis was the first to do a dragon on the body of a guitar and all i have to say is too bad he's dead otherwise he could set PRS straight. the bottom line here, at least the point im trying to make is please do not buy a paul reed smith guitar because they steal other peoples ideas and then claim them as their own and also charge handmade prices for machine made garbage as the previously mentioned mr. roman, who happens to be a huge alembic fan, would attest.

oujeebass · « **Reply #12 on:** September 03, 2003, 01:31:48 PM »

How about PRS being sued by Gibson,or Hamer. Both of those companies had elements of their designs stolen to make up what we call a PRS. I think their guitars are yuppie bluesmen guitars. Woke up this morning and found my BMW dead kinda of stuff.

elzie · « **Reply #13 on:** September 03, 2003, 05:59:35 PM »

Nothing to see here, keep moving

Paul II

(Message edited by elzie on September 03, 2003)

jleague · « **Reply #14 on:** September 03, 2003, 06:18:44 PM »

I don't want anyone to think I dislike PRS guitars . . . I have no desire to own one, but I do respect how they took the boutique-style guitar into the mainstream. I just don't like some of their business practices, and I think some of their fans are a bit over-zealous.

Obviously the dragon issue isn't much of one, since Alembic is offering two different dragons as options, and many other builders are doing the same.

As for Ed Roman, the only thing I like about him is his praise for Alembic. Otherwise, I've heard way too many horror stories about his business practices to get anywhere near his showroom.