Xploration • Curation • Recommendation
US-Hawaiian Corporate Entity Wages a War of Attrition on the entire Electric Guitar Industry and against its own best interests!
There’s been quite a lot of nonsense spouted and written about this recent legal skirmish - which amounts to massive judicial and jurisdictional overreach by Fender’s European Lawyers Bird & Bird.
’Standing, Default Judgement and Jurisdiction’
Essentially Fender won a Regional Dusseldorf court case against a Chinese Importer of essentially Counterfeit Stratocaster Guitars. Said entity had no corporate assets in Europe, failed to turn up to court, and Fender was awarded a win by default - with no real jurisprudence or actual official judgments being made - nothing being specifically judged on merits - simply a default win as the defendant failed to turn up for court.
Bird & Bird then conflated that court ruling with some sort of pan-EU Copyright Registration for the Stratocaster Shape - which had been part of Bird & Bird’s Dusseldorf case - but for which no formal judgment was made - beyond the default ruling against the failure of the defendant to show up.
The Dusseldorf court is regional - its jurisdiction is limited - and does not have pervasive powers even throughout the EU - especially on the back of a default court case win such as this was.
A USA lawsuit in 2009 initiated by Fender, resulted in the Stratocaster, Telecaster, and Precision Bass shapes being declared generic, and therefore Public Domain. The Dusseldorf regional ruling has no standing in the USA - where the prevailing judgement is that the Stratocaster, Telecaster, and Precision Bass are generic and ubiquitous and therefore entirely ’public domain’. The only Trademarks that exist and are in effect - are the Brand Logos and Headstock shapes, most of the functional and technical patents for the Stratocaster have long since expired! It is after all a 72 year old design!
You can see from Leo’s potted history below that he ended up designing Strat-style guitars for each of the guitar Brands he worked at, while the G&L Legacy Guitar was released posthumously - a year after his death. He nevertheless oversaw Strat-like designs at each of those companies. He never sought to patent or copyright the ’shape’ of his instruments - he was more interested in technical patents - typically concerning Pickups, Electronics and ’Tremolo Devices’.
Most of the details bundled into the Dusseldorf case by Bird & Bird would not stand up to legal scrutiny or challenge. The last time ’Shape’ was actually up in the courts on Merits was in 2009 - and the ruling was then unanimously ’Public Domain’. So beyond targeting out-and-out plagiarists and counterfeiters, Fender really has no standing to go after companies that produce Strat-like body-shape guitars.
Servco Pacific Inc
"Servco Pacific is a privately held, family-owned Hawaiian company with over a century of history, operating globally with over 30 automotive dealerships in Hawaii and Australia. Beyond mobility, the company maintains major investments in musical instruments—including a majority stake in Fender and ownership of Reverb.com — as well as capital investment."
Observers have pointed out that since Servco acquired Reverb.com in April of 2025 - they were able to see the sales data - as to how the PRS Silver Sky was outselling their own Fender equivalent models. It is presumed that the longer-term target of the Dusseldorf court case was always intended to be PRS. Where famously John Mayer could not get Fender to build him the signature guitar he desired - and he was compelled to go to PRS to get the level of quality and innovation that he required. Fender have generally rested on their heritage laurels to a large degree - and spun out mostly a load of variations on the same themes - just under new labels mostly. Had they maintained their quality and innovation in those sectors - they could surely have been more competitive against PRS. They have by far and away the largest distribution of any guitar company in the world!
When issuing 'Cease & Desist' notices and threatening businesses with $250,000 fines and destruction of all existing stock - corporations really need a proper jurisdictional ruling that is actually applicable in the territory the lawsuit was raised - also in terms of who the actual named target of the lawsuit was - which in the Dusseldorf case was a single Chinese Importer / Counterfeiter. Fender's lawyers have no cause or jurisdiction - particularly in the USA to go after any of those Guitar Manufacturers - where that shape is actively and legally Generic and in the Public Domain!
If the case ever goes properly to court for appeal - Fender will suffer the same indignity as the 2009 ruling once more. The Strat has been around since 1954, and Leo was not concerned in the slightest about copyrighting or protecting the shape of his guitar - in fact he made similar models for his other 2 guitar companies.
Servco / Fender have no proper case here, the weight of evidence and history are against them!
A Leo Fender S-Type Guitar Potted History!
- 1938 - Leo registers 'Fender Radio Service' Repair Shop
- 1944 - Leo Fender and Doc Kauffman patent a lap steel guitar with an electric pickup already patented by Fender
- 1945 - Leo teams up with Doc Kauffman to form 'K&F Manufacturing Corporation' - principally to build Hawaiian Guitars and Amps
- 1947 - Kauffman leaves, and Leo registers the business as 'Fender Electric Instrument Co'
- 1953 - Leo starts designing the Stratocaster with Freddie Tavares
- 1954 - Stratocaster launched
- 1956 - Fender awarded Patent for 'Tremolo Device for Stringed Instruments'
- 1965 - Fender sells company to CBS
- 1965-75 - Non-compete clause from CBS sale keeps Leo out of active duties for 10 years
- 1975 - Leo becomes President of Music Man (formerly Tri-Sonix)
- 1976 - Leo introduces StingRay models for Music Man
- 1977 - Leo designs Strat-like Sabre, and Cutlass models for Music Man
- 1979 - Leo teams up with old friends George Fullerton and Dale Hyatt to form 'G&L Musical Products'
- 1979-91 - Leo stays at G&L until his premature death in March of 1991
- 1990-91 - Leo oversees design of Strat-like G&L Legacy Guitar
- 1992 - G&L Legacy Guitar released posthumously
Targeting PRS!
Gibson made the mistake of going after PRS in 2005 - trying to claim ownership of the 'Single Cut / Singlecut Body Shape' and to prevent PRS from using the same. While PRS won out in the end. Generally most US courts feel that Les Paul style and Strat style body shapes are pretty much generic, ubiquitous and entirely in the public domain now.
You can go back centuries for stringed instruments to find similar patterns at play - particularly cinched waisted designs. Hence and why it is largely determined that Headstock shapes can be Trademarked, while the more obvious generic body shapes are already entirely public domain - and joint property of the people!
Servco / Fender tried to say that they were only going to go after companies who directly 'ripped' off their exact guitar design. While the entirety of the Body Design is already Public Domain. Only guitar headstocks can really be properly trademarked, as we've mentioned.
Nearly all 'Body Shape' court cases fail to hit - or get very minor rulings like with Gibson vs Dean.
In a lot of these corporate lawfare lawsuits - you're seeking damages, and postulating that such and such a brand 'stole' sales from your brand - and you should should therefore be awarded compensation for those monies that essentially 'went astray'!
Fender are trying to imply that had Silver Sky guitars not been around - then those prospects would have automatically bought Fender equivalents - which just cannot be proven and always fails to stand up to scrutiny - it's almost impossible to prove a negative in that sense.
That prevailing attitude also tends to infer that the general guitar-buying public are utter morons - and cannot identify or differentiate a specific guitar by all the typical markers. The subject of counterfeits is entirely merited - but in the case of the Fender Strat vs the PRS Silver Sky - those are objectively not the same guitars!
You can say that there are some very similar elements to them, a deal of overlap - but there are also numerous notable differences. And near enough everyone would say that no one would confuse a PRS Silver Sky for a Fender Strat. People buy the Silver Sky - because they like those details, the quality and the price of that specific instrument. Those customers had the opportunity to buy Fender - which is the most widely distributed guitar brand of all - but they chose instead to buy PRS!
At worst you can say that the Silver Sky is a 'Tribute' guitar - which doesn't skirt anywhere as near to plagiarism as some of those Behringer and Warm Audio designs do.
Since the core body shape is already in the Public Domain - and there are markedly different design elements - including the headstock and the significantly different cut-away portions - there is no way you could confuse a Silver Sky for a Strat or vice versa - Servco / Fender really doesn't have a case here!
Courts tend to act against monopolies and more in favour of consumer choice and fair competition - Fender should innovate and improve quality - not look to sure other successful companies for its own relative failures. Fender had first mover advantage - they had all the opportunities - and they squandered them!
Possible Remedies
Servco / Fender have massively overreached and misjudged the situation here - they've utterly destroyed a 70 year legacy!
Were Leo Fender still around he would be utterly distraught by what's going on.
The only remedy here is for Servco to sack their CEO and Law Firm, and grovel for an apology from the guitar buying public. The fact that they've doubled and tripled-down on their lawfare here - probably means it's already too late - and that said business will not recover for a generation. They need to rebuild their reputation from the grassroots and ground up. Too many prospects I fear have already been lost, and may never return.
Fender are currently about as hated as Bricks and Minifigs and the American Fork Police. None of this is going to end well for any of those entities. It all seems very emblematic of Trump's America!
Video References - A Lawyer Explains!
