Final week, shockwaves have been despatched by the guitar trade when it was claimed {that a} German regulation agency engaged on behalf of Fender had despatched stop and desist letters to different builders demanding they cease making Stratocaster-style guitars.

On the forefront of the dialogue has been US boutique maker LsL Devices, the one model to have at present gone public to verify it has allegedly obtained the letter from Fender’s attorneys – although varied others are assumed to have been despatched letters.

LsL publicly pledged to withstand Fender’s alleged try and make them cease producing Strat-bodied guitars, and now Guitar.com has seen what’s a proper response from an unconfirmed model that obtained one in all these letters to Fender’s attorneys, and likewise a letter that seems to be a response from them.

The letters – which have been extensively reported on-line – seem to firmly lay out each side of this alleged argument, and provide some wider context for what may occur subsequent.

What kicked all this off? 

If the unique Fender stop and desist letter is reputable, this chain of occasions was began when Fender received a default ruling towards Chinese language-based firm Yiwu Philharmonic Musical Devices Co within the Düsseldorf Regional Court docket in Germany.

The win was vital as a result of it outlined below EU regulation that the Stratocaster physique form was not merely a trademark, however a “copyrighted work of utilized artwork”, that could possibly be policed like another copyright.

The default judgement – which got here after Yiwu failed to show as much as courtroom – solely covers guitars made or offered within the EU, however on condition that LsL is a US-based model, the alleged C&D would suggest that Fender is trying to implement the ruling on any maker that sells devices contained in the European Union.

The letter, which Guitar.com has been unable to independently confirm as reputable, demanded that LsL stopped producing Strat-bodied guitars, handy over gross sales knowledge concerning these devices, to recall and destroy any infringing devices, and pay damages. The letter additionally supplied concessions on a few of these factors if the recipient agreed to cease making the guitars.

What’s occurred now?

LsL was the one firm to publicly declare they’d obtained the letter, and in an announcement to Guitar.com in addition to posts on a weblog, they vowed to battle again towards Fender’s alleged try and implement this ruling, and arrange a GoFundMe to assist with authorized prices.

On Tuesday, (26 Might) Guitar.com obtained a redacted in-depth riposte from an unnamed guitar model to Fender’s alleged letter – refuting each the substance of Fender’s claims, in addition to the legitimacy of their actions.

Notably, the letter was authored by Ron Bienstock – the US lawyer who has been concerned in quite a few guitar trade trademark instances over time, most notably representing the consortium of manufacturers that efficiently lobbied towards Fender’s try and trademark the Strat, Tele and P-Bass physique shapes in 2009.

Moreover, Guitar.com has now additionally seen a duplicate of a letter allegedly from Fender’s attorneys – now reported extensively on-line – that pushes again on a lot of what Bienstock wrote in his 16-page response.

What does this response letter declare?

Bienstock’s response on behalf of the unnamed model – which isn’t believed to be LsL – is as detailed as you’d anticipate from somebody who has enormous expertise litigating trademark instances within the music trade – and particularly his expertise of efficiently arguing for the generic nature of the Strat, Tele and P-Bass physique shapes 17 years in the past.

A core plank of Bienstock’s argument is that the default ruling towards Yiwu Philharmonic within the Düsseldorf Regional Court docket doesn’t bind LsL, which relies in California and as such is just not instantly topic to German regulation.

The letter additionally claims that as a way to safe the default judgement, Fender “misrepresented” the historical past of the Stratocaster’s design to the courtroom, and the function that Leo Fender performed within the creation of the instrument.

The letter alleges that Fender “invented” the story that Leo Fender was the “sole writer” of the Stratocaster design, and that “there have been no less than 4 extra collaborators within the design”. Moreover, the letter alleges that Leo Fender’s famously utilitarian and sensible strategy to purposeful design signifies that the guitar can’t be thought of a piece of utilized artwork.

“This collaboration is well-documented, as is Leo Fender’s notorious consideration to operate, manufacturability, and repairability, however not aesthetic design,” the letter goes on. “FMIC’s personal Justin Norvell, President, Americas, has even acknowledged Leo Fender’s now notorious quote, ‘If I’ve $100 to make a product, I’ll spend $99 making it work and $1 making it fairly.’”

As such, the letter asserts that Leo Fender was “a technician who admired operate and ease of producing; he was not an artist.” Due to this, plus the actual fact the Stratocaster had significant design contributions from “Fred Tavares, Invoice Carson, Rex Gallion and George Fullerton, amongst others”, the letter says “the details don’t match the required narrative to realize [Fender’s] purpose of acquiring a copyright for a portion of a guitar in any jurisdiction”.

Bienstock additionally alleges that Fender was negligent in policing its personal emblems for many years, resulting in many different manufacturers to utilise and evolve the design.

“No matter whether or not [Fender] ever gained mental property rights to the Strat physique form,” Bienstock asserts. “It definitely can’t now declare after the copy, distribution and communication to the general public by tons of of guitar corporations by their use of that very same physique form for over 70 years that any exclusivity will be had as to the alleged “utilized artwork” of the Strat physique form,” it says.

“[Fender] has forfeited its claims of possession of any mental property rights through categorical abandonment, acquiescence, and passivity.”

He additionally claims that different manufacturers have performed an enormous half in making the Strat an iconic design – noting the usage of the form on non-Fender guitars being utilized by legendary artists. It additionally notes that after he offered Fender and its designs to CBS, Leo Fender himself continued to make devices utilizing the Strat physique at Music Man and G&L.

“Aggressive guitars have been ubiquitously displayed on tv, in motion pictures, on the web and have been being performed by a number of the most influential musicians of all time, similar to Eddie Van Halen, who performed a Charvel Strat-style guitar and later a Kramer Strat-style guitar. Thus, the Strat form grew in recognition among the many common shopping for public,” Bienstock claims.

What has Fender mentioned in response?

For the primary time since this story broke per week in the past, Fender has publicly acknowledged the scenario. In an announcement to Guitar World, the model’s place and supreme purpose on this case has been clarified.

“Fender absolutely helps innovation and competitors throughout the guitar trade, together with such guitars with two horns and/or double cutaways,” the assertion reads.

“Fender’s purpose is solely to guard one of many firm’s most iconic and recognisable designs whereas persevering with to assist a vibrant and revolutionary guitar trade.”

Individually, Guitar.com has additionally obtained a response letter that seems to be from Fender’s attorneys to the letter.

Unsurprisingly maybe, the letter disagrees that Fender misled the Düsseldorf courtroom concerning the historical past of the Strat, noting that they, “took nice care in ensuring that every one our factual representations in our motion have been correct”.

“The Court docket of Düsseldorf then fashioned its view on whether or not the Stratocaster qualifies as a ‘work of utilized artwork’ below the circumstances put ahead by us in our motion. The panel which handed down this judgement might be essentially the most skilled panel in questions of ‘works of utilized artwork’ in Germany in the meanwhile, and arguably additionally in all of Europe.”

Whereas defending the legitimacy and robustness of the ruling and their proper to hunt to implement this on LsL and different manufacturers, the letter seems to additionally lay out the element of what Fender allegedly desires these builders to do as a way to stave off additional authorized motion.

“All that’s required and anticipated from third-party producers of Stratocaster clones is that they modify the design of their electrical guitars sufficiently in order that they don’t appear like roughly actual copies of the Stratocaster anymore,” it reads.

“We expect that this needs to be acceptable for everybody, because it shouldn’t impair the standard of their devices, however would solely require comparatively minor design modifications.”

Maybe essentially the most attention-grabbing and probably impactful a part of the alleged letter is a declare that whereas LsL have clearly taken the route of loudly and publicly pushing again towards the obvious stop and desist letter, and the unnamed model in query has responded by authorized means, different manufacturers have taken one other route.

“Lots of the addressees of that preliminary communication have reached out to us within the meantime, usually through their German attorneys, and have entered into affordable settlement discussions on the premise that they are going to discontinue making and/or promoting the “Stratocaster” clones,” it reads. “This proves that there’s not a unanimous refusal from all third events, however certainly additionally a substantial amount of understanding for our consumer, which nonetheless after all is just not coated within the media, on social media and within the discussions between the assorted makers.”

So what occurs subsequent? 

Within the alleged response from Fender’s attorneys, it’s claimed that the corporate has prolonged the deadline for manufacturers to comply with its phrases to eight June 2026.

Judging by the content material of their preliminary response, it doesn’t seem to be this unnamed model is inclined to settle any time quickly:

“We hereby demand that you simply withdraw everything of your claims as said in Your Letter,” Bienstock writes. “Our consumer has each proper to proceed to promote its guitars with Strat-style guitar our bodies, at any time when and wherever it so chooses, as does your complete MI trade on a worldwide foundation.

“Efforts by Your Consumer to bully rivals primarily based on misrepresentations and overstatements are anti-competitive. If Your Consumer continues to pursue these issues, Our Consumer will, after all, search all obtainable treatments, together with all attorneys’ charges and prices.”

Fender declined to remark additional on this case when Guitar.com reached out.