US Patent and Copyright search regarding EVH

[VB]

I got curious this morning and did an advanced search of the US. Patent and Trademarks and US Copyright Office data bases regarding our friend EVH.
here are the links to the search
EVH Copyrights
US Patent's held by EVH
If you pay close attention to the copyrights Ed transfered ownership of the 5150 on guitars to Earnie Ball during his days with MusicMan Guitars.
I can't find anything with Eds name on it regarding stripes and guitars.
If anyone has any documented info on this please let me know.
Keith
VGB

[SteveS235]

See the VH website:

http://www.van-halen.com/newsite/tcla.html

[ericgtr]

This part always gets me:

1.2 "Frankenstein Design" is the pattern(s) of distinctive crisscrossing lines on a solid colored background registered with the U.S. Copyright Office (Reg. No. Vau 505-308), and includes derivative works thereof. To see examples of the Frankenstein Design click Here







Looks like any city that wants to re-design their freeway system is going to owe Ed some bucks [img]images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif[/img]

[VB]

Thanks. that refers to the fansite, not to the guitars. Its also expired in 2002.
VGB

[YetAnotherOne]

Ed's copyrights won't expire until we're all long dead. Trademarks don't have to be registered to be valid and enforceable (if you have money to pay an IP lawyer you can enforce just about anything, particularly against persons who don't have money to pay an IP lawyer or who can find better uses for their money than payin an IP lawyer). The issues aren't as simple as doing a web search.

[VB]

Yet. I wasn't assuming that a simple websearch was sufficient. But as Eric points out, If you go by the generic statements registered with the copyright office, half of mother nature owes Ed a few bucks.I was simply making a statement of what Ed has registered.
And according to our company attorney for it to be an enforceable Trademark it has to be registered or it falls under public domain. It's another case of "I have more money than you so I can spend till your exhausted" Also Trademarks Copyrights and Patents are extremely easy to work around. A few minor additions or changes can void any copyright infringements. Its usually the way something is portrayed that creates legal problems. Using Eds name or likeness is usually the biggest problem.
But as i stated earlier, Eds first Frankenstiens violated all kinds of patent and copyright infringements i.e. Fenders patent on the Strat headstock was one, in which they were compensated large sums of money by Charvel and others for using that design without significant changes.
VGB

[YetAnotherOne]

If your company attorney actually told you that all unregistered trademarks fall into the public domain he/she has committed malpractice (unfortunately this is not an uncommon occurrence). Google the term "common law trademark" for more.

Regarding the "few minor changes" to "void any copyright infringements" I'd suggest researching the statutory term "derivative work" (for starters) and reading some case law to determine how broad the interpretation of that concept can be.

Use of someone's name/likeness without permission often gives rise to causes of action under laws other than those governing copyrights & trademarks (though both (c) and tm law could theoretically apply as well depending on the factual scenario).

Whether or not Ed's Frankenstein violated someone else's patents / copyrights / trademarks has no bearing on his ability to enforce any rights he might have acquired in his candystripe artwork unless the artwork itself was the subject of another's patent / copyright / trademark.

The above is, of course, not legal advice.