Today in "Conflicts between two parties, both equally unlikable" - Page 3
Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 17 to 24 of 75

Thread: Today in "Conflicts between two parties, both equally unlikable"

  1. #17


    Join Date: Sep 2008
    Location: Kitchen/Laundry Room
    ME: Ironing Board
    MA: Laundry Mangle
    MB: Cascade Dish Detergent
    Rig: Washing Machine

    iTrader: 2 (100%)

    Yeah it's a really lazy single cut headless. Looks like an obese Wolfgang.

    It's just, like, literally the most Jeff Kiesel-ish response to a Gibson lawsuit. "Hey, if they can do it, we can do it too!". Brilliant!
    Argbadh - RHLC©

  2. Remove Advertisements
    MetalGuitarist.org
    Advertisements
     

  3. #18


    Join Date: Nov 2011
    Location: Portugal

    iTrader: 0

    Read on FB that Kiesel had sent a Cease and Desist letter to Thomann because of their new Headless guitars. Haven't found confirmation if true.

  4. #19


    Join Date: Sep 2008
    Location: Kitchen/Laundry Room
    ME: Ironing Board
    MA: Laundry Mangle
    MB: Cascade Dish Detergent
    Rig: Washing Machine

    iTrader: 2 (100%)

    It's confirmed across a few groups/forums at this point.

  5. Remove Advertisements
    MetalGuitarist.org
    Advertisements
     

  6. #20


    Join Date: Nov 2011
    Location: Portugal

    iTrader: 0

    LOL then

    I think I'm going to order a Headless HB just for the kicks

  7. #21


    Join Date: Sep 2008
    Location: Boston, MA
    ME: EBMM(s)
    MB: Spector Legend 4
    Rig: AFX3 / KPA / MKV

    iTrader: 34 (100%)

    Quote Originally Posted by Randy View Post
    It's confirmed across a few groups/forums at this point.
    Why are so many of you in Kiesel facebook groups? Is there a secret society for people who love shitty looking guitars by the guy who ruined Carvin?

  8. #22


    Join Date: Nov 2011
    Location: Portugal

    iTrader: 0

    Im not even one any of them. I saw it on Guitarist group or Thomann group.

  9. #23


    Join Date: Nov 2010
    Location: Ontario, Canada
    ME: Gibson SG
    Rig: Pedals -> Dark Terror

    iTrader: 0

    Didn't the Dean lawsuit tank because the court deemed that the V had been un-patented for so long that it's basically too late to claim IP? If this is true, what makes them think it would work with Kiesel? Even if they win, I can't see this helping their image.

    Also, I could be totally out to lunch here, but wasn't the V one of the shapes that was deemed too ubiquitous for any one company to copyright? I know the Strat shape got that because the shape is largely ergonomic/functional, and it's apparently not realistic to expect no one else to shape a guitar like that.

  10. #24


    Join Date: Feb 2010
    Location: Laramie, Wyoming
    ME: Jackson AT Pro
    Rig: Rivera K Tre

    iTrader: 15 (100%)

    I took the thirty seconds to google "Jeff Kiesel patents", since google has a "patent" section like they have a news and an images section. I wonder if Jeff Kiesel's attorneys tell him "Jeff, you are a fucking idiot, not only do none of your arguments hold up, the only thing this is going to do is give Thomann a good laugh. They'll probably get your letter, and immediately frame it to keep it around to laugh at.", or if at this point his attorneys know Jeff Kiesel is just easy money and there is no way they will be able to talk him out of his stupid ideas.

    And hilariously enough, Jeff Kiesel, next level idiot, holds like 3-4 pathetically shitty patents for "ornamental guitar designs".

    You can see the patent for his brilliant innovation here. https://patents.google.com/patent/US...=kiesel+guitar

    Jeff Kiesel, legendary idiot, also shot himself in the foot on his own patent, which, once again, is for an "ornamental guitar design" and not anything functional by explicitly stating that his patent doesn't cover his stupid bevels.





    "The broken lines are included for the purpose of illustrating the environmental structure and form no part of the claimed design."

    The bevels that are the only thing that have a tiny, tiny chance of holding up in court as a "brilliant and uniquely Kiesel innovation." All the other "Design features" are present in other patents Jeff cites in his own patents. Which place Jeff Kiesel closer to the holder of the original patents than it does in placing Thomann to Jeff Kiesel.

    Not only that, Jeff Kiesel also cites the designs he ripped off in his own patents. Which is how patents work, but anyone taking the 30 seconds to review it could see from the patents he cites that the idea isn't even his, so it's very obtuse as to what his stupid patent actually covers.

    I don't know if Jeff Kiesel is legitimately enough of an idiot to think this is going to work, or he just thinks drumming up the drama is good for business, or if he personally likes the drama himself. Does Jeff Kiesel actually know it's a bluff that not only has no chance of holding up in court, but is also not the sort of thing a smaller company like Kiesel would come out ahead on by initiating costly proceedings against a much bigger and more competent company?

    Or if he thinks, "I don't think I'm going to win, but if you make no effort to defend your IP, in court that weakens your case." Which, once again, is fucking stupid because the slim section of the IP that could conceivably be determined to be "Kiesel" in court not only sucks, but doesn't represent a section of the market anyone even wants.

Tags for this Thread


Fractal Audio Systems  Shred Training  Angel Vivaldi
Bowes Guitarworks  NumbSkull Audio Production



VigLink badge