Jump to content
Heritage Owners Club

Heritage sues Gibson


chico

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, rockabilly69 said:

The one's that the new guard are putting out, seems to me the QC is improving at the end of the line. And a new H150 or H525 is going to be much cheaper than it's Gibbons counterpart!

Ah, I see what you're saying. I thought you meant it in regards to the design of the guitars. 

 

12 minutes ago, Kuz said:

Let's face it, as a son of a BILLIONAIRE, Heritage is not a beloved little Mom & Pop company anymore.  Heritage is a target because the owner has a sh!t load of money.  I believe that is the main reason they were targeted.... because they are worth the effort to target! 

 

Nah. This is a pattern by Gibbons. They went after Kiesel too, a totally different market/design and ownership as well as being another small builder in America. They continued the lawsuit against Dean guitars too, to which as of last summer Dean has filed to have some of Gibbons's USA trademarks cancelled altogether (which has happened in the EU as of last fall) so keep your eyes peeled. We also don't know who else they're going after if people have signed agreements etc. Behind the scenes, in the Heritage filing and the Dean filing there's some good dirt. Gibbons telling Heritage they'll "outspend them in legal fees" or Gibbons calling every Dean dealer personally threatening to sue the dealers for stocking the guitars etc....

 

I mean, anyone who has been to the Heritage plant in the past year or two knows they're not poised to in any way to take over market share in the guitar world! As for "son of billionaire" well last time I looked up the info Bandlab as a whole didn't have 1% of KKR's (private equity owners of Gibbons's debt) annual revenue. 

 

When Gibbons sends letters to a guy like Bartlett or Yaron etc no one complains, Gibbons is trying to loosely apply trademark to anything with humbuckers & 4 knobs in the past decades. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, deytookerjaabs said:

Gibbons telling Heritage they'll "outspend them in legal fees" or Gibbons calling every Dean dealer personally threatening to sue the dealers for stocking the guitars etc....

 

 

That is exactly what I mean, most of the other companies have the financial means to fight back, so the industry as a whole won't cave to them.  Its the small, one-man shops that fall under Gibbons's radar that will cave into the demands.  Everyone else will just be a status quo.  However, I think any company that has to spend money on litigation should, at the very least, file a suite to recoup legal expenses to frivolous lawsuits filed by Gibbons.  If they have the money to burn, they'll settle everyone one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2020 at 2:12 PM, rockabilly69 said:

Do you think that Gibsons are inferior to Heritage, or do you just hate the Gibbons company, and their business practices? 

Biz practices. They're guitars are fine. Im from Michigan, so Im partial to my home state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://guitar.com/news/Gibbons-and-heritage-clash-over-redacted-court-filing/   <<<<<<LINK

an excerpt from the article..... 

According to this latest filing, which is dated 25 March 2020, after the original suit was filed, Heritage approached Gibbons to request that the original document be released without the redactions – the law dictates that both parties must agree before this could happen. Heritage thereafter asked Gibbons if it would consent to filing of an unredacted version of the Complaint. Gibbons refused without explanation.

 As a result, Heritage is forced to bring this motion seeking the Court’s permission either to file the Complaint in unredacted form, or alternatively to file an unredacted version of the Complaint under seal.”

While it’s unclear what Gibbons objected to about the documents being released unmodified, without their consent, Heritage decided to appeal to the court to allow them to release the documents, or have Gibbons explain why they wanted them to remain redacted.

“As the party who wishes to have information kept from public view, Gibbons bears the burden of justifying the need for such secrecy,” claims the Heritage complaint.

Advertisement
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...