8 ms·

Thomann takes legal action against Fender

203 points by Audiophilip 3mo ago

kgwxd 3mo ago
Good luck, but they've already destroyed the name, all they have left to make money is IP, pretty sure they're only focused on this.
nosioptar 3mo ago
I've always hated Fender. This pig fuckers used to charge about 50% extra for a lefty guitar, assuming you didnt want something like a Jazzmaster, which wasn't available in lefty for decades. Worse part is that lefty fenders always have something fucked because they put zero care into them, despite charging a premium for them. Fender doesnt even make a good product. I've pulled strat style guitars out of dumpsters that were better than a fender.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
sparkling 3mo ago
502 Bad Gateway, the HN kiss of death Archive.org link: https://web.archive.org/web/20260624025836/https://www.thomann.de/blog/en/inside/thomann-takes-legal-action-against-fender/ https://web.archive.org/web/20260624025836/https://www.thoma...
- eqvinox 3mo ago
  Works fine here…
  - kulahan 3mo ago
    Dead for me, as is the archive link.
    - eqvinox 3mo ago
      Still works... it's not showing as using a CDN, in fact they seem to own their IPv4 space (212.204.75.161) and getting connectivity from a midsize Bavarian ISP (M-net). Maybe there's a routing problem somewhere. The path for me is <my ISP> - DE-CIX - their ISP.
altairprime 3mo ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20260624025836/https://www.thomann.de/blog/en/inside/thomann-takes-legal-action-against-fender/ https://web.archive.org/web/20260624025836/https://www.thoma...
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
jorisw 3mo ago
Those who don’t know what this is about may appreciate Rick Beato’s (a guitar music vlogger) rant about it https://youtube.com/watch?v=OU7RUpkXsV0 https://youtube.com/watch?v=OU7RUpkXsV0
- pimeys 3mo ago
  And if somebody here doesn't follow his channel, he is the guy who does easily the best music interviews on YouTube.
- nl 3mo ago
  I think this makes some excellent points. In particular the cultural impact of the S-shape guitar has been enhanced by people playing non-Fender S-shapes. Think Eddie van Halen on his Frankenstrat which has it's own Wikipedia entry and has been displayed in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. That was probably a Charvel body. That goes to the heart of the "work of applied art" argument. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein_(guitar) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein_(guitar)
  - jpfromlondon 3mo ago
    Fender own Charvel so that's okay.
vintermann 3mo ago
Apparently Fender got bought up by a private equity fund, Servco Pacific Capital. Who would have guessed.
- al_borland 3mo ago
  Apparently this started back in 1985. > In 1985, Bill Schultz and a group of investors—including company employees and external companies like Servco Pacific Capitol—purchased Fender from CBS for $12.5 million and renamed it "Fender Musical Instruments Corporation" (FMIC). > Ownership changed in December 2001, when private equity firm Weston Presidio bought a controlling stake in Fender for $57.8 million. > Longtime investor Servco instead bought out Weston Presidio, with TPG Growth as an equal partner. > In 2020, Servco bought out TPG Growth's stake, making them Fender's majority owner. A long history of private equity ownership. I'm not sure CBS owning them would be much better, which started in 1965. As much as I like to blame private equity for the downfall of once great companies, I'm not sure how to feel about this one, as they've been investor owned and passed around for decades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fender_%28company%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fender_%28company%29
  - leoc 3mo ago
    IIRC pre-GFC FMIC has a generally good reputation among guitarists, and certainly in comparison to the preceding era of Fender, when it was owned by CBS.
  - queenkjuul 3mo ago
    Schulz and co were a big step up from CBS, genuinely. Schulz was associated with the original company, not a random PE firm. It's the 2000-2020 exchanges that were detrimental
- jwitthuhn 3mo ago
  This is true but the buyout happened in 1985. Servco Pacific has been in charge for longer than Leo Fender and CBS, the two previous owners, put together.
- alexjplant 3mo ago
okanat 3mo ago
No such contempt has one against another in Western culture as much as politicians have against their constituents, and trendsetter companies against the cultural heritage they helped to create.
DDayMace 3mo ago
[dead]
worik 3mo ago
I am confused. What is this about?
- dofm 3mo ago
  1) Fender got someone in Germany to buy a Strat type guitar from a Chinese vendor on Aliexpress and ship it to Germany (I assume this part) 2) Fender sued said small Chinese Aliexpress vendor in a regional German court for selling a "copied" design in Germany 3) The small Chinese guitar vendor didn't turn up, obviously 4) Fender got a default judgement that the S-type (Stratocaster etc.) guitar body shape (which has indisputably been in the public domain in the USA since 2009) is a "functional work of art" in which they have copyright. 5) Fender's weird law firm went on a rampage, in the EU and USA, using said default judgement as if it represents some kind of precedent, warning guitar firms (PRS included) and music retailers to stop selling them, recall and destroy their inventory on sale in the EU, and confirm they had done so, or be sued 6) guitar people, especially luthiers working in the USA who have solid reason to believe the S shape is public domain, took that about as well as you'd expect 7) Fender tried to walk it back, especially the bit about smashing perfectly good guitars 8) Thomann, based in Germany, certainly Fender's largest retailer outside the USA and one of the biggest music retailers in the world, have decided not to take it lying down.
  - eigenspace 3mo ago
    This is extra bizarre to me, because for most purposes German law doesnt operate on a system of "legal precedent" the way countries which adopted the UK model do. Am I missing something about Germany following a precedent system for patent/copyright or something, or is this even dumber than it sounds?
    - dofm 3mo ago
      It's that dumb. Sorry, I rushed through my comment and perhaps didn't make it clear. They have a default judgement only. But they used it to demand US-based manufacturers recall European-bound inventory, destroy it and certify it destroyed. Even though they know full well that inventory can legally be sold in the USA — which is part of the near-comical gaslighting walkback the FMIC CEO attempted the other day. They are already admitting it's not a USA thing.
j4kp07 3mo ago
[dead]
dofm 3mo ago
I still think this whole Fender-suing-everyone thing will end up with Thomann owning them either partially or completely. But the weird German lawsuit was always about the fact that some private equity suits (or bad Hawaiian shirts, it seems) are upset that Thomann (and others) sell the PRS Silver Sky, which as they have probably deduced from the reverb.com data they now own, likely outsells equivalent Fender models by some margin. So I think Thomann are just bringing it on. And they aren't the only ones: LSL hired the lawyer who won the judgement that put the S-type body shape in the public domain in 2009.
- borlox 3mo ago
  German lawsuits are far less expensive than … what we learn from huge american lawsuits in tv. Unlikely that Thomann will make piles of money. It‘s more about the right to keep selling those guitars and quite some marketing impact.
- d1sxeyes 3mo ago
  Thomann own an extremely popular brand, Harley Benton, which (obviously) sells S-types. I think it’s more likely that this is about the ST series than about the Silver Sky.
  - dofm 3mo ago
    The new CEO of Fender is from the luxury goods world. Each Silver Sky model (SE or non) outsells the equivalent Stratocaster model, from what I understand, by a noticeable margin, which Servco will now know with clarity, because they have sales data from reverb (which they acquired one month before they took out this lawsuit). It is a naïve take, but have a look at what Fender's CEO looks like, how he dresses and carries himself, and tell me that a big part of this isn't injured pride that John Mayer went to PRS. I think if this was really about the cheap body guitars — a nearly zero-margin market for decades — they wouldn't have sent a C&D to LsL or PRS, because that was always going to invite trouble. Harley Benton is a problem at some small level and I am sure Fender will suggest it is, but Fender have had a "buy the real thing" type of marketing campaign for both Fender and Squier since the 90s at least. The 2009 lawsuit made this clear; it detailed all Fender's "buy original" marketing campaigns as a way of pointing out that Fender has never policed the right to make the S-type body shape. Squier competes pretty adequately with Harley Benton and all the other cheap brands; at that price, being "Fender's budget brand" has prudence associated with it. What has changed is that Fender are losing out at the top end to high-end luthiers who give a shit, and PRS. And now they know exactly how badly. This lawsuit will feature a lot of data from reverb.com, I suspect.
Animats 3mo ago
This is a place where European copyright law is significantly different from US copyright law. In the US, copyright cannot cover a "functional part", which is why there is a third party auto parts industry. Improved functionality can be covered by a utility patent, but that lasts only 20 years. Designs can be protected by design patents, which last only 15 years. So in the US, any rights left in the form of the Stratocaster expired long ago. US companies sometimes try to make "trade dress" or trademark claims, but that's much weaker than copyright.
- codedokode 3mo ago
  But technically the guitar does not have to have a shape of a strat. It could be any other shape, why not be creative and make your own design?
  - frankfrank13 3mo ago
    Because strats sell. Oddly shaped guitars don't, or at least not for a long time, and would never break into the top 10 best selling guitar shapes.
    - codedokode 3mo ago
      But I think people who want to buy a strat, would prefer to buy a Fender strat and not a cheaper copy that has the same shape but might sound worse? I personally do not like the price though.
      - _kblcuk_ 3mo ago
        OTH people who want to buy strat would prefer to buy "strat with all inherited problems already fixed", be it PRS silver sky, or any boutique brand like LSL / Sandberg / Suhr / Tom Anderson.
        dofm 3mo ago
        I don't play electric guitar (fretted, anyway) at the moment, and I think John Mayer is very beige, but the Silver Sky SE is a really good guitar. They fixed a lot of stuff, and the lower cutaway is really nicely done.
normaler 3mo ago
I used to work for a Thomann competitor "Musicstore" in ~2005. The server was some tower server in a back office with a note reminding everyone not to turn it off. With Thoman being hugged to death right now I would like to think of there being a similar situation (its probably fine, but it made me feel nostalgic).
- matchagaucho 3mo ago
  Similar work experience, I was with a CBS-owned music company that had a CNC machine with some old Fender Telecaster and Stratocaster body templates. The hardware manager was cool and would let employees turn slabs of wood into Tele- and Strat-style bodies after hours. When the Fender/German court ruling came down, my first thought was: Fender has had roughly 70 years with the Stratocaster design, and the broader industry has been making S-style guitars for decades. Surely at some point a body shape becomes generic, right?
  - mc32 3mo ago
    Things become generic if you stop defending them/enforcing your IP. I think the iPhone at one time defended the design of its “squircle” corners. Eventually settling out of court.
    - anamexis 3mo ago
      I think you're thinking of trademark, but this isn't a trademark claim, it's a copyright infringement claim. The legal question is whether the guitar shape can be copyrighted.
      - dofm 3mo ago
        That is the legal question FMIC think they have settled with this legal win, yes. Two legal questions they will now be asked, by Thomann or LsL, are: - if such a copyright could exist, what shape precisely are Fender arguing it would cover? - if such a copyright could exist, would Fender (the company) have title to it? Answering these questions could get them into some difficulty, legally. Neither are obvious and the second one is really problematic.
ben7799 3mo ago
I play guitar, I own a Fender guitar and a Fender amp, along with another non-fender amp and 2 other non Fender guitars. I'm just super sick of hearing about this story. Guitar players online are way too worked up about this. Fender is being annoying, but there is no way I'm getting rid of my Fender guitar or amp over this, and there is no way any of this would stop me from buying another one. The Fender shapes just don't need to be copied at all. I live near a famous boutique type shop. They may have some boutique guitars that rip off the shapes of Fenders, it's been tolerated, but they have a lot of guitars that don't rip off Fender shapes and many of them are really great guitars. Too many players are acting like the sky is falling if Fender wins with any of this stuff. The sky is not going to fall. We'll go back to the way things used to be where Fender body shapes weren't ripped off so often and it will be fine. I think some of the doom and gloom is also because too many players are super obsessed with buying more and more guitars all the time. It's all about what is the next purchase as opposed to just enjoying the guitar they have.
- Aboutplants 3mo ago
  Fender has seen quality deteriorate to extremely concerning levels in the past 5-10 years, ask any luthier. That frustrated players and now this is icing on the cake as competition has surpassed them in quality and in value and now they come beating them up since they are seeing their piece of the marketplace get smaller.
  - ben7799 3mo ago
    I've been playing long enough that I disagree. Fender's quality is very good now compared to when I started playing. But so is everyone else's.
- nemomarx 3mo ago
  the shape is in the public domain though? it would be like trying to patent a rounded rectangle, it's inherently silly
- grayhatter 3mo ago
  It's really impressive how you could apparently argue so strongly for Fender's defense: but the message that I took away was Fender is obviously the bad guy in this story, and I want nothing to do with them... and I haven't even clicked on the new tab for the story yet.
codedokode 3mo ago
On a side note, think how conservative music world is, if people are still manufacturing and successfully sell guitar designed in 50s. You can probably take a 50s guitar and connect to a modern amp, or take a modern guitar and connect to a 50s amp and it will work. Compare this, for example, to smartphone chargers or headphones and their compatibility.
- sampo 3mo ago
  > You can probably No need for "probably". That absolutely works.
  - Rendello 3mo ago
    "Who says you need to buy a guitar?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_F7aiOvdwE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_F7aiOvdwE (technically a "diddley bow": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diddley_bow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diddley_bow)
- vitally3643 3mo ago
  Smartphone chargers had legitimate reason to change. Higher power, faster data, and we learned the hard way that micro usb and all the proprietary connectors before it were fundamentally physically flawed. Audio hasn't changed at all in the last two centuries. An analog audio signal is fundamental physics and there's nothing to gain or change or improve in any meaningful sense. TRS/phono jacks likewise are just so brute force stupid and rugged that there was never a reason to change. The connectors and interfaces never changed because the underlying signals never changed because there's nothing to change. Digial electronics on the other hand legitimately have gone through real and worthwhile changes, and been radically redefined many times in the last 60 years.
  - wink 3mo ago
    Mini USB was clunky, but how was it flawed? Unless you count data transfer rates as physical. Never seen one break.
- 3mo ago
dang 3mo ago
Recent and related: Fender escalates legal campaign against S-style guitars - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48189539 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48189539 - May 2026 (132 comments)
TrackerFF 3mo ago
The problem is that after their original patent expired, they sat on their hands for too long. By the time they tried to trademark in 2008/2009, their bodies were considered generic in the US. Gibson, on the other hand, did what Fender should have done and applied for trademark (for their Les Paul body) back in the late 80s. Now other brands are eating their lunch, and Fender is seemingly trying a last hail marry to get this settled. My guess is that if they manage to get a positive ruling in Europe, they'll somehow try to use that as case for US courts.
- vondur 3mo ago
  "My guess is that if they manage to get a positive ruling in Europe, they'll somehow try to use that as case for US courts." That's exactly what they have done, they sued a Chinese company that was making knock-off Strat copies and selling them in Germany. Fender sued them, the Chinese company was a no show and Fender took that as a win to go after PRS who is selling a John Mayer Strat style guitar.
  - lambdaone 3mo ago
    A win that, as I understand it, did not actually set a precedent and is thus of no actual legal use to them.
    - vondur 3mo ago
      I would agree with you. I don’t think it will be enough for them to win in the US.
28304283409234 3mo ago
This makes me want to buy a new PRS. At Thomann.
qwery 3mo ago
Even if you think Fender is solely responsible for the design, which is frankly ridiculous, the bloody thing's been around forever and now they're suing? Having a court stop actual counterfeits -- sure, nobody has a problem with that. That's not what this is. Then there was the headstock thing, Fender was notorious for pursuing makers of guitars with headstocks that had any resemblance to the Strat headstock. Let's ignore how limited the design space is considering the constraints of six strings - six tuners at the end of a narrow strip of timber. Fender was obviously acting in an anti-competitive way at that point. At the same time, the quality of their own products continued to drop. Coincidence? Now they are going after anything that looks like an electric guitar. The general "S-style" body form, as popularised/iconified by the Stratocaster is popular for many reasons. A lot of those reasons (I would say most) are practical/functional. Fender shouldn't be allowed to possess the shape, let alone use it as an anti-competitive weapon in order to coast along for another century just because the brand happens to come with some notable IP. Fender's monopoly over the shape shouldn't be protected by law/courts. Here's why: It's a functional design -- a matter of ergonomics and practicality. For a lot of guitarists, the S body style is the most effective, comfortable shape to play. For a concrete example of an "iconic", yet clearly functional design feature: the top point of the "S" is where the front strap hook is. Having this point protrude forwards (along the neck) helps balance the weight and this provides the player with physical control over the mass of the guitar. Many of the subtle features of Stratocaster body are obvious practical improvements -- it's the result of filing down sharp edges that were noticed when attempting the play the instrument. Imagine you're starting from a classical acoustic design, what steps would you take to make it more playable and make it electric at the same time? It's an incremental design built on forms that have been used by luthiers for centuries. It's not a Fender shape -- it's an (electric) guitar shape.
hettygreen 3mo ago
F*ck em - let them have that body shape. Seriously at this point do we need more stratocaster shaped guitars? There's so many cool companies doing unique body shapes, if you're gonna take the time to build a guitar why not put some thought into the design?
karim79 3mo ago
I have two strats. Both signature editions. Ed O'Brien and Mark Speer edition. I also have a fender accoustic which is perhaps my most favouritist guitar ever. I fucking love fender and will forever.
insaneirish 3mo ago
In one fell swoop, Fender destroyed every bit of musician goodwill they had. For right or for wrong (and I think for wrong), their claims are baseless. I wish them (and their PE overlords) a powerful defeat, ideally in a court of law, but if not, in the court of public opinion.
queenkjuul 3mo ago
This one really bothers me: Leo Fender himself declined to copyright the Strat body Leo Fender himself sold "Strat clones" of the exact variety Fender Corp is trying to ban, after the sold the Fender name. I own one. So Fender Corp is trying to retroactively assert that Leo Fender stole his own design from Fender Corp in 1979, they didn't have any issue for 47 years, but now because a Chinese company didn't show up in German court, they have eternal license to the design Leo Fender explicitly chose not to sell them. Fuck Fender. My Jazz Bass is still my favorite instrument, I've had it 20 years and played hundreds of gigs, but I guess I'm never buying another

203 points by Audiophilip 3mo ago

kgwxd 3mo ago

Good luck, but they've already destroyed the name, all they have left to make money is IP, pretty sure they're only focused on this.

nosioptar 3mo ago

I've always hated Fender. This pig fuckers used to charge about 50% extra for a lefty guitar, assuming you didnt want something like a Jazzmaster, which wasn't available in lefty for decades. Worse part is that lefty fenders always have something fucked because they put zero care into them, despite charging a premium for them. Fender doesnt even make a good product. I've pulled strat style guitars out of dumpsters that were better than a fender.

deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]

sparkling 3mo ago

502 Bad Gateway, the HN kiss of death Archive.org link: https://web.archive.org/web/20260624025836/https://www.thomann.de/blog/en/inside/thomann-takes-legal-action-against-fender/ https://web.archive.org/web/20260624025836/https://www.thoma...

eqvinox 3mo ago
Works fine here…
- kulahan 3mo ago
  Dead for me, as is the archive link.
  - eqvinox 3mo ago
    Still works... it's not showing as using a CDN, in fact they seem to own their IPv4 space (212.204.75.161) and getting connectivity from a midsize Bavarian ISP (M-net). Maybe there's a routing problem somewhere. The path for me is <my ISP> - DE-CIX - their ISP.

altairprime 3mo ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20260624025836/https://www.thomann.de/blog/en/inside/thomann-takes-legal-action-against-fender/ https://web.archive.org/web/20260624025836/https://www.thoma...

deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]

jorisw 3mo ago

Those who don’t know what this is about may appreciate Rick Beato’s (a guitar music vlogger) rant about it https://youtube.com/watch?v=OU7RUpkXsV0 https://youtube.com/watch?v=OU7RUpkXsV0

pimeys 3mo ago
And if somebody here doesn't follow his channel, he is the guy who does easily the best music interviews on YouTube.
nl 3mo ago
I think this makes some excellent points. In particular the cultural impact of the S-shape guitar has been enhanced by people playing non-Fender S-shapes. Think Eddie van Halen on his Frankenstrat which has it's own Wikipedia entry and has been displayed in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. That was probably a Charvel body. That goes to the heart of the "work of applied art" argument. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein_(guitar) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein_(guitar)
- jpfromlondon 3mo ago
  Fender own Charvel so that's okay.

vintermann 3mo ago

Apparently Fender got bought up by a private equity fund, Servco Pacific Capital. Who would have guessed.

al_borland 3mo ago
Apparently this started back in 1985. > In 1985, Bill Schultz and a group of investors—including company employees and external companies like Servco Pacific Capitol—purchased Fender from CBS for $12.5 million and renamed it "Fender Musical Instruments Corporation" (FMIC). > Ownership changed in December 2001, when private equity firm Weston Presidio bought a controlling stake in Fender for $57.8 million. > Longtime investor Servco instead bought out Weston Presidio, with TPG Growth as an equal partner. > In 2020, Servco bought out TPG Growth's stake, making them Fender's majority owner. A long history of private equity ownership. I'm not sure CBS owning them would be much better, which started in 1965. As much as I like to blame private equity for the downfall of once great companies, I'm not sure how to feel about this one, as they've been investor owned and passed around for decades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fender_%28company%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fender_%28company%29
- leoc 3mo ago
  IIRC pre-GFC FMIC has a generally good reputation among guitarists, and certainly in comparison to the preceding era of Fender, when it was owned by CBS.
- queenkjuul 3mo ago
  Schulz and co were a big step up from CBS, genuinely. Schulz was associated with the original company, not a random PE firm. It's the 2000-2020 exchanges that were detrimental
jwitthuhn 3mo ago
This is true but the buyout happened in 1985. Servco Pacific has been in charge for longer than Leo Fender and CBS, the two previous owners, put together.
alexjplant 3mo ago

okanat 3mo ago

No such contempt has one against another in Western culture as much as politicians have against their constituents, and trendsetter companies against the cultural heritage they helped to create.

DDayMace 3mo ago

[dead]

worik 3mo ago

I am confused. What is this about?

dofm 3mo ago
1) Fender got someone in Germany to buy a Strat type guitar from a Chinese vendor on Aliexpress and ship it to Germany (I assume this part) 2) Fender sued said small Chinese Aliexpress vendor in a regional German court for selling a "copied" design in Germany 3) The small Chinese guitar vendor didn't turn up, obviously 4) Fender got a default judgement that the S-type (Stratocaster etc.) guitar body shape (which has indisputably been in the public domain in the USA since 2009) is a "functional work of art" in which they have copyright. 5) Fender's weird law firm went on a rampage, in the EU and USA, using said default judgement as if it represents some kind of precedent, warning guitar firms (PRS included) and music retailers to stop selling them, recall and destroy their inventory on sale in the EU, and confirm they had done so, or be sued 6) guitar people, especially luthiers working in the USA who have solid reason to believe the S shape is public domain, took that about as well as you'd expect 7) Fender tried to walk it back, especially the bit about smashing perfectly good guitars 8) Thomann, based in Germany, certainly Fender's largest retailer outside the USA and one of the biggest music retailers in the world, have decided not to take it lying down.
- eigenspace 3mo ago
  This is extra bizarre to me, because for most purposes German law doesnt operate on a system of "legal precedent" the way countries which adopted the UK model do. Am I missing something about Germany following a precedent system for patent/copyright or something, or is this even dumber than it sounds?
  - dofm 3mo ago
    It's that dumb. Sorry, I rushed through my comment and perhaps didn't make it clear. They have a default judgement only. But they used it to demand US-based manufacturers recall European-bound inventory, destroy it and certify it destroyed. Even though they know full well that inventory can legally be sold in the USA — which is part of the near-comical gaslighting walkback the FMIC CEO attempted the other day. They are already admitting it's not a USA thing.

j4kp07 3mo ago

[dead]

dofm 3mo ago

I still think this whole Fender-suing-everyone thing will end up with Thomann owning them either partially or completely. But the weird German lawsuit was always about the fact that some private equity suits (or bad Hawaiian shirts, it seems) are upset that Thomann (and others) sell the PRS Silver Sky, which as they have probably deduced from the reverb.com data they now own, likely outsells equivalent Fender models by some margin. So I think Thomann are just bringing it on. And they aren't the only ones: LSL hired the lawyer who won the judgement that put the S-type body shape in the public domain in 2009.

borlox 3mo ago
German lawsuits are far less expensive than … what we learn from huge american lawsuits in tv. Unlikely that Thomann will make piles of money. It‘s more about the right to keep selling those guitars and quite some marketing impact.
d1sxeyes 3mo ago
Thomann own an extremely popular brand, Harley Benton, which (obviously) sells S-types. I think it’s more likely that this is about the ST series than about the Silver Sky.
- dofm 3mo ago
  The new CEO of Fender is from the luxury goods world. Each Silver Sky model (SE or non) outsells the equivalent Stratocaster model, from what I understand, by a noticeable margin, which Servco will now know with clarity, because they have sales data from reverb (which they acquired one month before they took out this lawsuit). It is a naïve take, but have a look at what Fender's CEO looks like, how he dresses and carries himself, and tell me that a big part of this isn't injured pride that John Mayer went to PRS. I think if this was really about the cheap body guitars — a nearly zero-margin market for decades — they wouldn't have sent a C&D to LsL or PRS, because that was always going to invite trouble. Harley Benton is a problem at some small level and I am sure Fender will suggest it is, but Fender have had a "buy the real thing" type of marketing campaign for both Fender and Squier since the 90s at least. The 2009 lawsuit made this clear; it detailed all Fender's "buy original" marketing campaigns as a way of pointing out that Fender has never policed the right to make the S-type body shape. Squier competes pretty adequately with Harley Benton and all the other cheap brands; at that price, being "Fender's budget brand" has prudence associated with it. What has changed is that Fender are losing out at the top end to high-end luthiers who give a shit, and PRS. And now they know exactly how badly. This lawsuit will feature a lot of data from reverb.com, I suspect.

Animats 3mo ago

This is a place where European copyright law is significantly different from US copyright law. In the US, copyright cannot cover a "functional part", which is why there is a third party auto parts industry. Improved functionality can be covered by a utility patent, but that lasts only 20 years. Designs can be protected by design patents, which last only 15 years. So in the US, any rights left in the form of the Stratocaster expired long ago. US companies sometimes try to make "trade dress" or trademark claims, but that's much weaker than copyright.

codedokode 3mo ago
But technically the guitar does not have to have a shape of a strat. It could be any other shape, why not be creative and make your own design?
- frankfrank13 3mo ago
  Because strats sell. Oddly shaped guitars don't, or at least not for a long time, and would never break into the top 10 best selling guitar shapes.
  - codedokode 3mo ago
    But I think people who want to buy a strat, would prefer to buy a Fender strat and not a cheaper copy that has the same shape but might sound worse? I personally do not like the price though.
    - _kblcuk_ 3mo ago
      OTH people who want to buy strat would prefer to buy "strat with all inherited problems already fixed", be it PRS silver sky, or any boutique brand like LSL / Sandberg / Suhr / Tom Anderson.
      - dofm 3mo ago
        I don't play electric guitar (fretted, anyway) at the moment, and I think John Mayer is very beige, but the Silver Sky SE is a really good guitar. They fixed a lot of stuff, and the lower cutaway is really nicely done.

normaler 3mo ago

I used to work for a Thomann competitor "Musicstore" in ~2005. The server was some tower server in a back office with a note reminding everyone not to turn it off. With Thoman being hugged to death right now I would like to think of there being a similar situation (its probably fine, but it made me feel nostalgic).

matchagaucho 3mo ago
Similar work experience, I was with a CBS-owned music company that had a CNC machine with some old Fender Telecaster and Stratocaster body templates. The hardware manager was cool and would let employees turn slabs of wood into Tele- and Strat-style bodies after hours. When the Fender/German court ruling came down, my first thought was: Fender has had roughly 70 years with the Stratocaster design, and the broader industry has been making S-style guitars for decades. Surely at some point a body shape becomes generic, right?
- mc32 3mo ago
  Things become generic if you stop defending them/enforcing your IP. I think the iPhone at one time defended the design of its “squircle” corners. Eventually settling out of court.
  - anamexis 3mo ago
    I think you're thinking of trademark, but this isn't a trademark claim, it's a copyright infringement claim. The legal question is whether the guitar shape can be copyrighted.
    - dofm 3mo ago
      That is the legal question FMIC think they have settled with this legal win, yes. Two legal questions they will now be asked, by Thomann or LsL, are: - if such a copyright could exist, what shape precisely are Fender arguing it would cover? - if such a copyright could exist, would Fender (the company) have title to it? Answering these questions could get them into some difficulty, legally. Neither are obvious and the second one is really problematic.

ben7799 3mo ago

I play guitar, I own a Fender guitar and a Fender amp, along with another non-fender amp and 2 other non Fender guitars. I'm just super sick of hearing about this story. Guitar players online are way too worked up about this. Fender is being annoying, but there is no way I'm getting rid of my Fender guitar or amp over this, and there is no way any of this would stop me from buying another one. The Fender shapes just don't need to be copied at all. I live near a famous boutique type shop. They may have some boutique guitars that rip off the shapes of Fenders, it's been tolerated, but they have a lot of guitars that don't rip off Fender shapes and many of them are really great guitars. Too many players are acting like the sky is falling if Fender wins with any of this stuff. The sky is not going to fall. We'll go back to the way things used to be where Fender body shapes weren't ripped off so often and it will be fine. I think some of the doom and gloom is also because too many players are super obsessed with buying more and more guitars all the time. It's all about what is the next purchase as opposed to just enjoying the guitar they have.

Aboutplants 3mo ago
Fender has seen quality deteriorate to extremely concerning levels in the past 5-10 years, ask any luthier. That frustrated players and now this is icing on the cake as competition has surpassed them in quality and in value and now they come beating them up since they are seeing their piece of the marketplace get smaller.
- ben7799 3mo ago
  I've been playing long enough that I disagree. Fender's quality is very good now compared to when I started playing. But so is everyone else's.
nemomarx 3mo ago
the shape is in the public domain though? it would be like trying to patent a rounded rectangle, it's inherently silly
grayhatter 3mo ago
It's really impressive how you could apparently argue so strongly for Fender's defense: but the message that I took away was Fender is obviously the bad guy in this story, and I want nothing to do with them... and I haven't even clicked on the new tab for the story yet.

codedokode 3mo ago

On a side note, think how conservative music world is, if people are still manufacturing and successfully sell guitar designed in 50s. You can probably take a 50s guitar and connect to a modern amp, or take a modern guitar and connect to a 50s amp and it will work. Compare this, for example, to smartphone chargers or headphones and their compatibility.

sampo 3mo ago
> You can probably No need for "probably". That absolutely works.
- Rendello 3mo ago
  "Who says you need to buy a guitar?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_F7aiOvdwE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_F7aiOvdwE (technically a "diddley bow": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diddley_bow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diddley_bow)
vitally3643 3mo ago
Smartphone chargers had legitimate reason to change. Higher power, faster data, and we learned the hard way that micro usb and all the proprietary connectors before it were fundamentally physically flawed. Audio hasn't changed at all in the last two centuries. An analog audio signal is fundamental physics and there's nothing to gain or change or improve in any meaningful sense. TRS/phono jacks likewise are just so brute force stupid and rugged that there was never a reason to change. The connectors and interfaces never changed because the underlying signals never changed because there's nothing to change. Digial electronics on the other hand legitimately have gone through real and worthwhile changes, and been radically redefined many times in the last 60 years.
- wink 3mo ago
  Mini USB was clunky, but how was it flawed? Unless you count data transfer rates as physical. Never seen one break.
3mo ago

dang 3mo ago

Recent and related: Fender escalates legal campaign against S-style guitars - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48189539 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48189539 - May 2026 (132 comments)

TrackerFF 3mo ago

The problem is that after their original patent expired, they sat on their hands for too long. By the time they tried to trademark in 2008/2009, their bodies were considered generic in the US. Gibson, on the other hand, did what Fender should have done and applied for trademark (for their Les Paul body) back in the late 80s. Now other brands are eating their lunch, and Fender is seemingly trying a last hail marry to get this settled. My guess is that if they manage to get a positive ruling in Europe, they'll somehow try to use that as case for US courts.

vondur 3mo ago
"My guess is that if they manage to get a positive ruling in Europe, they'll somehow try to use that as case for US courts." That's exactly what they have done, they sued a Chinese company that was making knock-off Strat copies and selling them in Germany. Fender sued them, the Chinese company was a no show and Fender took that as a win to go after PRS who is selling a John Mayer Strat style guitar.
- lambdaone 3mo ago
  A win that, as I understand it, did not actually set a precedent and is thus of no actual legal use to them.
  - vondur 3mo ago
    I would agree with you. I don’t think it will be enough for them to win in the US.

28304283409234 3mo ago

This makes me want to buy a new PRS. At Thomann.

qwery 3mo ago

Even if you think Fender is solely responsible for the design, which is frankly ridiculous, the bloody thing's been around forever and now they're suing? Having a court stop actual counterfeits -- sure, nobody has a problem with that. That's not what this is. Then there was the headstock thing, Fender was notorious for pursuing makers of guitars with headstocks that had any resemblance to the Strat headstock. Let's ignore how limited the design space is considering the constraints of six strings - six tuners at the end of a narrow strip of timber. Fender was obviously acting in an anti-competitive way at that point. At the same time, the quality of their own products continued to drop. Coincidence? Now they are going after anything that looks like an electric guitar. The general "S-style" body form, as popularised/iconified by the Stratocaster is popular for many reasons. A lot of those reasons (I would say most) are practical/functional. Fender shouldn't be allowed to possess the shape, let alone use it as an anti-competitive weapon in order to coast along for another century just because the brand happens to come with some notable IP. Fender's monopoly over the shape shouldn't be protected by law/courts. Here's why: It's a functional design -- a matter of ergonomics and practicality. For a lot of guitarists, the S body style is the most effective, comfortable shape to play. For a concrete example of an "iconic", yet clearly functional design feature: the top point of the "S" is where the front strap hook is. Having this point protrude forwards (along the neck) helps balance the weight and this provides the player with physical control over the mass of the guitar. Many of the subtle features of Stratocaster body are obvious practical improvements -- it's the result of filing down sharp edges that were noticed when attempting the play the instrument. Imagine you're starting from a classical acoustic design, what steps would you take to make it more playable and make it electric at the same time? It's an incremental design built on forms that have been used by luthiers for centuries. It's not a Fender shape -- it's an (electric) guitar shape.

hettygreen 3mo ago

F*ck em - let them have that body shape. Seriously at this point do we need more stratocaster shaped guitars? There's so many cool companies doing unique body shapes, if you're gonna take the time to build a guitar why not put some thought into the design?

karim79 3mo ago

I have two strats. Both signature editions. Ed O'Brien and Mark Speer edition. I also have a fender accoustic which is perhaps my most favouritist guitar ever. I fucking love fender and will forever.

insaneirish 3mo ago

In one fell swoop, Fender destroyed every bit of musician goodwill they had. For right or for wrong (and I think for wrong), their claims are baseless. I wish them (and their PE overlords) a powerful defeat, ideally in a court of law, but if not, in the court of public opinion.

queenkjuul 3mo ago

This one really bothers me: Leo Fender himself declined to copyright the Strat body Leo Fender himself sold "Strat clones" of the exact variety Fender Corp is trying to ban, after the sold the Fender name. I own one. So Fender Corp is trying to retroactively assert that Leo Fender stole his own design from Fender Corp in 1979, they didn't have any issue for 47 years, but now because a Chinese company didn't show up in German court, they have eternal license to the design Leo Fender explicitly chose not to sell them. Fuck Fender. My Jazz Bass is still my favorite instrument, I've had it 20 years and played hundreds of gigs, but I guess I'm never buying another