Maybe I'm just an old fart, but something that really gets me angry is the theft by "other" manufacturers of the Stratocaster body style. To me, the shape of a Strat is the defining symbol of Fender. Just like a Les Paul is the shape of Gibson.
All I really know of the subject is that Fender lost a patent lawsuit at some point and that gave everyone the right to copy that body style. It's infuriating! A Strat is a Strat. Why can't other manufactures just come up with their own designs? Is it because the shape of a Strat the most recognized guitar shape in the world? Is it because of it's graceful flowing lines? Cheap exploitation? All of the above? I don't really know. I just know I hate it.

_________________
September 18th, 1970
There were none better before him.
There have been none better since.

Hello! Allow me to play Devil's Advocate. I for one thank God that Fender lost the patent. Contrary to popular belief (and I have to glance around at where I am), Fender does NOT make, in any way shape or form, the pinnacle of electric guitars. All one has to do is look at the rest of Fenders "Stable" to see the pathetic excuses and failed attempts (and I'm talking aethetics here) at other Fender body designs, namely the Telecaster (along with the Jaguar, Jazzmaster, Mustang). Fender's claim to fame is it one of the first electric guitar companies ever. Musicians didn't really have much choice back in the day.

Fender entitled to the Stratocaster design (which I'm not arguing, BTW) would be synonymous with IBM having sole rights to the personal computer. And I'm thankful for both, as later companies have taken and improved the designs and gone forward, not perpetually stuck in the past.

All that being said, I can't wait to see my spanking new strat delievered via FedEx today. Only 7 more minutes till I get off of work!

Utter nonsense in my view mate.

If it wasn't for the people out east copying the strat and tele. Dan Smith would never have been sent out to Japan and returned with a guitar that the CBS builders wept over. Because they couldn't equal it (Dan Smiths words not mine).

CBS wouldn't have seen the need to improve. Would have gone bust, wouldn't have sold to FMIC. You wouldn't have been able to buy a strat at all nowadays.

Competition is what keeps manufacture healthy.

_________________
No no and no

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Arjay

_________________
"Here's why reliability is job one: A great sounding amp that breaks down goes from being a favorite piece of gear to a useless piece of crap in less time than it takes to read this sentence." -- BRUCE ZINKY

I sure like mine. I can,t think of a copy that I would buy.

I'm with Arjay on this, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I also agree with ORCRiST in that Fender has taken one design and made a name from it. Looking around their lineup is pretty sad. The Strat and the LP are the only guitars that have that mass appeal. Sure, you get people that play a V or an Explorer, Mustang etc... but to be honest the LP and the Strat are the leaders.

What sickens me more than other companies copying the Strat design is Fender taking that same exact design they've been using since the 50's, changing a pickup or the number of screws in the scratch plate and putting it out there as some new designer strat and charging out the ying yang for it. Look through your old magazines, there is a "NEW" Strat being put out on the market all the time. Makes me ill.

And if I can continue a rant, what is the deal with these "Road Worn" or "Relic'd" guitars? I'm not saying they don't look cool and I'm not saying that you should wear it down yourself or it doesn't count. No, what bothers me about those guitars is that the various guitar makers take a guitar, paint it, and then proceed to beat the crap out of it, sand it down, rust the parts etc... and then have the balls to put it out there for more than what a nice clean guitar costs. The sad thing is that people actually buy into tha,t which in turn gives the maker every right to charge as much as they like for it. Sad, just sad.
MULLY

The way I see it, as long as mine say's Fender I'm happy and everyone else can only struggle to make theirs sound similar to a Fender. There are a lot of other brands and various models getting the same routine. But no matter what they do or try they can't even come close to the real deal.

NBG

+1, cheering wildly from the bleachers!

Arjay

_________________
"Here's why reliability is job one: A great sounding amp that breaks down goes from being a favorite piece of gear to a useless piece of crap in less time than it takes to read this sentence." -- BRUCE ZINKY

1.) last i checked the tele is pretty damn successful
2.) those other "failures" are also quite legendary. for a prime example, look at the 80s SoCal punk scene.... almost nothing but jazzmasters and jaguars.... then look at seattle in the mid 80s - whenever the hell grunge died in your opinion.... MUSTANGS ERVRYWHERE!!!!!!

_________________
Favorite bands:

Melvins
The Jesus Lizard
Cows
Big Business
R***man
Minutemen
Flight
Minor Threat
Big Black
Shellac
Karp
Scratch Acid
Wipers
Pixies

Okay, lets first get some facts straight here. In the USA there are two primary types of legal "protection" for products - patents are one; trademarks (or "trade dress") is the other. Patents expire a set year from the application date - from 1862-1994 they had a 17-year duration; since 1995 they have a 20-year duration. Trademarks do not expire as long as the trademark holder "enforces" the trademark by filing against anyone who violates the trademark.

Leo Fender patented his designs - so in the case of the Stratocaster the patents were applied for circa 1953/1954, meaning they expired circa 1970/1971. By that point CBS owned the company; at some point after they purchased the company from Leo they applied for and were granted a trademark on the headstock shapes (the Tele shape, the original Strat shape, the original Jazzmaster shape, and the larger shapes used by CBS). It was considered that the headstock shape was the "signature" of the builder - which is why Andersons, Suhrs, Groshs, etc. can have the basic Fender body shapes but the headstocks are different (and in the case of James Tyler the headstock is radically different from a Fender).

About 4 years ago FMIC decided to attempt to trademark their classic body shapes. However, everyone who was alread building Fender-style guitars banded together to challenge Fender's trademark application for the bodies. The patent/trademark courts decided that since Fender hadn't "defended" the body shape (only the headstock shape) that the body designs had fallen into the public domain. Fender started preparing their case at the time when Gibson had won a trademark infringement case against PRS for the PRS Singlecut guitars (granted by a circuit judge in Nashville, TN - Gibson's home town); however, by the time Fender actually filed their application PRS had won the case on appeal.

Trademark and Patent law can be pretty complex; I'm not a patent attourny but this is the "layman's Cliff's Notes" version of what went down.

John

You make a very good point about the complexity of patent and copyright laws.
Didn't Fender employ or buy the Japanese company rather than prosecute them. Thats a good indication about how far they thought they'd get in a courtroom.

_________________
No no and no

That's a good account, John -- and quite accurate.

FMIC's legal division simply acted too late to defend the corporation's interests.

Arjay

_________________
"Here's why reliability is job one: A great sounding amp that breaks down goes from being a favorite piece of gear to a useless piece of crap in less time than it takes to read this sentence." -- BRUCE ZINKY

So you dislike the Tele...but to say it was a failed attempt is kind of off base...it is an incredibly successful and the precursor to the Strat...so i would say maybe you need to requalify a statement like that. I am sure Jimmy Page didn't feel that way with his Dragon Tele...you have heard of Stairway to Heaven yes???
ABS

I think the Gibson SG and 335 were also moderately successful.

I agree, this was simply the fault of Fender for not getting a trademark 60 years ago.

Changing the subject slightly...
I find guitar shapes facinating. Some work, but some just look odd and random.
I hope someone comes up with a new shape someday that will become as classic as the strat or the LP (there are other shapes other than those I like too)
Maybe I should get on that