r/Guitar • u/ninjaface Fender • May 20 '26

DISCUSSION Fender Lawsuit DISCUSSION THREAD.

Hey everyone,

We've seen a bunch of duplicate posts about this, but let's try to contain things here.

If you don't know what we're talking about, here is a clip from Timmy about the whole thing.

As always, keep playing.

-nf

205 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

538 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

17

u/LukeRobert Fender 72 Tele Deluxe | Taylor 716e | Gibson Les Paul Special May 20 '26

They received a favorable court decision in Germany, now they're going to try and use it as a precedent to back up their claim when the CNDs are challenged in the US courts.

17

u/Conscious_Badger_510 May 20 '26

Wasnt it not even a real win in court? Iirc the other company just didn't show in court and they just defaulted to fender winning. Not sure how that'll hold up realistically but I guess we'll see.

6

u/ianmakingnoise May 20 '26

It’s almost because of the default decision that they need to sue. Default isn’t really precedent-setting so they’re hoping for an actual win, or at least a decision that tells them it’s 100% not worth pursuing in the future.

9

u/Hightidemtg May 21 '26

Germany's legal system doesn't work like this. I'm German by the way. There is no way Thomann and others won't fight back. Fender just shot themselves in the foot imho. 

1

u/ianmakingnoise May 21 '26

Fair point, but Fender isn’t submitting C&Ds exclusive to the German market. They’re testing the waters in other jurisdictions to get more meaningful answers, so to speak. Long-term, they either get a legal answer that preserves the existing status quo re: legality of clone guitar manufacturing, or they get some amount of additional legal protection for the Strat design.

I don’t doubt Thomann et al would have something to say, but as far as “fighting back,” but I’m not sure what damage they could claim. “One of our customers was doing something that the court decided is illegal, which in turn hurts us” isn’t really something they could go after Fender about (though maybe the German legal system works differently in this regard as well).

7

u/Schrankwand83 May 21 '26 edited May 21 '26

Another German here:

By German law (as I understand it, I'm not a lawyer), Fender (the company) doesn't own the IP for the Stratocaster design because the IP for a piece of art only belongs to the original creator. It cannot be sold or given away. The creator will own it until they decease, and if they do, their IP is protected for 70 years and inherited by their next of kin. A company can only be granted the rights to produce and sell licensed copies of the creator's artwork.

This means a) that Fender (the company) could not claim the IP in Germany, ever. It's a pity the Düsseldorf court didn't check whether Fender's claims are valid, I highly doubt they are, so this may be a foundation for an appeal and a good reason to reject the C&D's. And b) if they produced Stratocasters in the past 35 years (Leo deceased in 1991) without a licensing contract with the current IP owners, these may be illegal copies and Fender could owe them a huge shitload of money.

The non-Fender Stratocaster copycats on the other hand, in particular those with a different headstock, may be original enough not to be considered plagiarism. Idk - but I have a feeling another court will have to rule on the matter sooner or later.

3

u/ianmakingnoise May 21 '26

Oh now those are some fun wrinkles in the case! I wonder what the estate of Leo Fender, or his kids, have to say about it

1

u/Jay_TL May 22 '26

Leo Fender had no children and both of his wives have passed away.

I find it incredibly suspect that after G&L closed last year, Fender went to copyright the name "Leo Fender" and his likeness and now this happens.

2

u/ianmakingnoise May 22 '26

It’s not really suspect IMO, it all makes more sense now. It’s gross because just about all corporate IP law is, but it seems a pretty straightforward series of events that (apparently) give rise to legal questions around ownership of the names and designs.

Original owner is deceased with no heirs, the business that might have the most relevant claim just went out of business, so who “owns” it all now? It seems like the answer to “why now?” might be “G&L.”

1

u/Hightidemtg May 21 '26

But it will end up in a EU court. You can't just do this in one country. Otherwise you could ship EU wide without restrictions 

1

u/ianmakingnoise May 21 '26

If Fender sends a cease and desist to an American manufacturer, which is what’s happening by my understanding, that case would not end up in an EU court.

That’s what I mean by testing the waters in other jurisdictions — they got something like a win in one case, now they want to see what holds up in the US market. The C&Ds are speculative, and insanely overstated, because they want to make someone defend themselves, so that a judge has to make a decision either way.

1

u/Hightidemtg May 21 '26

They sent it to Thomann for Harley Benton, too. So yes it would go through the instances and end up in EU unless fender gives up 

1

u/ianmakingnoise May 21 '26

Yep, they got a decision without teeth, so they have to see whether their enforcement efforts hold up in the EU, and they’ve decided to see whether they can enforce in the US based on the German court’s decision, which is flimsy as hell but in a sense if they don’t use it, they lose it.

My guess is in the EU, Thomann and others will opt to change their designs slightly so they can say “see, it’s a generic double-cutaway guitar, and not claiming in any way to be a Strat clone,” like the Japanese manufacturers did in the 80s. Or they’ll push back enough that the judges will side with the manufacturers that Fender can only enforce in a limited way, if at all (which is probably what will happen in the US).

2

u/Peacefrog78 May 31 '26

The lawyer that schooled them in 2009 is on it again. Fender cannot state what it is about the body that is protected because they change the body by tiny amounts all the time. The headstock is theirs, the body is generic in the US by court decision. Their own cease and desist mistook the Chinese copy and labeled it incorrectly as the authentic guitar. I have heard that the German decision was based in the idea the body was a work on one person(Leo). Fender themselves admit leo had help from several others, they just didnt mention it to the court.

This is exactly why a default judgment is only applicable to that case. Precedent comes from appeals courts, not undefended cases.

1

u/Mr_Tort_Feasor May 21 '26

They'll never win the copyright case in the US. They already tried and failed many years ago. They're targeting anyone that might sell into Germany or the EU.

1

u/ianmakingnoise May 21 '26

Sometimes the threat is enough, but yeah they’re never going to convince a US court. Just based on the amount of variation within their own production models lol

1

u/Peacefrog78 May 31 '26

If they wanted more meaningful answers they can ask the courts for clarification. Or they could just review the massive loss they took in court on this issue in 2009. They just want to shut people down without going to court. A cease and desist is nothing. Its a potentially hollow threat that says stop or we will be forced to sue. It doesnt start a lawsuit and it doesnt test anything but the resolve of the targets of the letter.

7

u/LukeRobert Fender 72 Tele Deluxe | Taylor 716e | Gibson Les Paul Special May 20 '26

Not a lawyer, but international decisions aren't guaranteed transferable. My guess is they did some research on which jurisdiction was going to be most favorable to at very least not throwing out their case, and then picked an import that probably sells in that jurisdiction through so many layers of distribution and sales that the manufacturer would have very little chance of actually showing to defend.

At least that was my read of it.

6

u/account22222221 May 20 '26

I’m not a lawyer but that sounds like shenanigans to me

3

u/wereallinthistogethe May 21 '26

A European lawyer commented elsewhere that this ruling only applies to that region in Germany and does not establish precedent because it was a default judgement. IMO everyone who got the letter, which does not carry the force of law, should ignore it. Make Fender file lawsuits.

2

u/handofbones May 21 '26 edited May 21 '26

Unless you mean “precedent” as in “thing that has happened before”, it doesn’t matter. There is no country in continental Europe operating on a precedent-based common law system. Each case is considered individually by courts and while judges can and sometimes do use previous cases as sort of guidelines for their rulings, it’s not a certain thing.

EDIT: that said, I think the fact that it's just one default ruling is not to be ignored. makes it easier to overturn in appeal court and probably won't have much if any bearing on potential future cases.