|
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10581
Location: NJ | http://www.ovationfanclub.com/
check out the acoustic electric guitars....looks like we have seen these all before.... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 15654
Location: SoCal | Al:
Am I missing something? Your link just goes back to the front page of the fan club. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 119
Location: Philadelphia, PA 19107 | Al, double-check your links! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10581
Location: NJ | http://www.dillionguitars.com/
oops now how did that happen |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | Point one. If you want them to know something you should email KMC marketing. I'm not sure how much time they spend here.
Point two. It looks like the back has a defined edge between the back and sides. That is different enough to avoid the trademark. Just because it is molded and roundish it does not infringe.
Point three. These look as exciting as warm sour milk. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2002
Posts: 8
Location: Los Angeles, California | Someone a few days ago mentioned that he was looking at an Ovation or an Ovation copycat... I think Dillion is the one he was talking about.
Hard to tell from the pictures if they're really worth looking at.... plus the website doesn't give much information about the company, nor the construction of the guitars, nor why they have a rounded composite back.
While the Hybrid model (DHL199CET) looks interesting [to try out at a store] with its humbuckers, I don't know how they can call it an acoustic with out any soundholes.... where is the sound going to project from ?
I'm not sure if patents are still protected by KMC. Isn't there only a 20 year life to patents ?
Anyways, looks like all the raves [on their site :eek: ] are about their electric guitars and not their AEs. I think the AEs are more about fad [their own twisted sense] fashion than sound or true value.
Kal |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 126
Location: UK | MM how do they get away with the J35CET model? seems a little bit too close for comfort, im sure that one will definatley get a few " Ooo thats one of them Ovation guitars innit!" |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | Patents run for 17 years. What we were successful in doing (first time it was done too) was to convert the patent into a design trademark. Trademarks are for lifetime. But again, if you make it different, evem though it's similar, you've gotten around it.
These are undoubtedly made in some Asian country and being marketed by some distributor.
As for no sound holes that's true, less sound. We made an elite once without sound holes. Looked like a woman without....well you can figure that one out. I gave it to my friend Debanjo who played it at a gig and it had no responce. The air got compressed inside and the top wouldn't move. I put Epaulets on it and cut the holes and the problem was gone, sounded good again. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | I think ol' Paul Reed Smith might get a little pissed at some of the solids & semi-solids, they've even used the bird inlays on other designs. This is the way the far east can produce such cheap products, they "borrow" designs & concepts. Some punters are happy because they have something that resembles, no matter now vaguely, the genuine article. The really insidious thing is that the people who commission these pieces of crap are in the US & Europe. "Crapping where you eat", is an expression that springs to mind.
Paul (T)
[ May 03, 2002: Message edited by: Paul Templeman ] |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 15654
Location: SoCal | Paul:
The Japanese car manufacturers did the copy thing for years in the late 60's to mid 70's. Then watch out, they started putting out their own product. Sometimes, it's a way to start developing a brand name. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Paul, this is blatant ripp-off. The Japs copied for years & got good, then started their own R&D. Some Far-east original designs will stand on their own merits & the best of them are as good as anything on the market at their price point. This stuff is little more than theft, but it's just an oriental factory thats responding to a Western order and customer demand.
Paul(T)
[ May 03, 2002: Message edited by: Paul Templeman ] |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 873
Location: puerto vallarta, mexico | keeping an open mind i can't condemn them since i haven't played them, but it looks like they tried to copy lots of popular guitars and are relying on gimmicks, flash, high tech (lots of laser cutting)and probably 3rd world labor to produce a huge line in a short time. i suspect their r&d dept is more like s&c (study and copy) barn. the gimmicky ones will catch allot of uneducated eyes and make sales for these guys. only time will tell, but i don't see anything that threatens quality guitars. just the pasture flavor of the month for lambs-----------------meadow muffin--clover--ripple or should it be rippoff. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | Meadow-muffin-clover-ripple!! You gotta love this guy!!!!!
These gitters are just cheep copy ripoffs. There have been many before them and there will be plenty more.
Their blueprints are probably the original catalogues with whiteout and new lines drawn here and there to make it "slightly" different to keep the lawyers at bay. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10581
Location: NJ | I have a problem with companies that just take someone's R & D and copy it with little changes and reap the benefits of the original company. I have seen some of the copies and well with a little steel wool I can buff the decal off and say "eh it must be an Ovation that lost the decal" and sell it even quicker.
I think Ovation had the right idea with bringing in their own imports before they were copied but now it looks like we have copies of the copies of the copies. that way they can control the quality and output and models that are made that represent their product line
Hey Fender almost went under in the 80's because they did not want to do the import thing and everyone else was making strats and now there are so many fender models I doubt the salesman can keep track. And I am sure Fender is the most recognized name in the world. Am I the only one who remembers when Fender was in trouble??
Mackie sued berhinger for copying their popular mixer and won in court but it took them years and a lot of money. So what Berhinger pays them off and made profit from their design so in the mean time they get to design something new but still got the benefits. These battles are costly and not easily won.
Currently it is alleged that behringer's amp is a copy of the tech 21 trademark 60. Tech 21 is a pretty interesting company I know some of the guys that work there and like some of their products. I have no clue if they will be able to fight them or not and even if they do big deal. So these fights have to be chosen wisely.
It is eye opening to walk through the namm show and see how many companies are represented and have copied so many instruments microphones amps etc with no regard for copyrights and if they are able to be shut down then a new company will open in its place.
The most interesting thing to me is that there is a market for these fakes. I found it more appealing when the forgien companies designed their own products like the Teisco etc at least these were inventive and had appeal even if they were not the best instruments. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 7211
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest | FYI (only because I'm a Behringer fan) Mackie did not win the suit. Behringer and Mackie according to press releases found on the Los Angeles court website (which I'm trying to relocate), settled out of court as although the citcuit was the similar, the components used were not even close to the same. Basically mackie was suing on circuit theory.
Personally I think BOTH companies did it for the publicity (which is how I'm gonna tie this to this thread). On the outside Behringer and Mackie look similar. On the inside (and I have seen the inside of both).. they look NOTHING alike. Behringer has plug-in components, mackie's are hard wired (on this model). Anyway.. My point (trying to not get lost in the minutia) is that BOTH companies received TONS of free legit press, and TONS of internet free press. After the suit, BOTH companies profits sky-rocketed!!!!!! I don't know about Mackie, but Behringer released a whole new line of additional products within 6 months of the news hitting the press.
No such thing as bad press I guess. I wonder how much of this is happening with the Ovation "copies". |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10581
Location: NJ | Miles
I knew that mention of Berhringer would ruffle your feathers. LOL But as my pre law background reminded me that although an out of court settlement is not an admission of guilt or innocence, it presupposes that a proponderance of the evidence was in favor of the plaintiff enough so that the defendant would consider a cash sum for a dismissal or no contest plea.
As you are aware I am not a big fan of either poduct so there is nothing lost with me. I do agree that both parties did benefit from the publicity an it most likely helped boost both of their sales. Fortunately in this instance both products are eh..well..."respectible"
In the case of the ovation knock offs it is not the first time or I assume the last some one will do that. Unfortunately IMHO it only adds to the confusion surrounding the blurring of the line between the USA product and the import. Since the celebrity line is no longer designated that way on the headstock, it is considered an "ovation" by the general buying public.
Plain and simple to the uneducated a round back equals Ovation. It does not matter what nameis on the headstock or the contry of orgin.
[ May 05, 2002: Message edited by: alpep ]
[ May 05, 2002: Message edited by: alpep ] |
|
| |
ATTENTION KAMAN LAWYERS!!!!!!!!!
