Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Research Library - "Lawsuit" Made in Japan Guitars
The Famous Gibson Lawsuit
The "Lawsuit Era:"
In 1971, a Japanese musical instrument firm called Hoshino Gakki acquired an American guitar builder Elger Guitars and re-branded it as Ibanez USA. These guitars were made in Japan mostly at the Fujigen Gakki/Matsumoku plant and were patterned as copies of popular Gibson and Fender models (Anbar, 2023).
Japanese manufacturing quality had improved greatly by then, and the US domestic makers such as Gibson and Fender had seen a decline in the quality of their own instruments (Anbar, 2023). As a result, Ibanez guitars were selling very well as alternatives to the large US brands in their own US market. Some famous musicians were also adopting Ibanez instruments on stage, which further drove sales in favor of the Japanese maker (Benedittini, 2024).
On June 9, 1977, Gibson filed a lawsuit against Elger Guitars (Ibanez USA). The lawsuit Gibson v. Elger Co accused Elger (doing business as Ibanez USA) of copyright infringement of their "open book" headstock design on a specific guitar model. The lawsuit sought 1.6M JPY in damages for the copied design on their Ibanez products (Benedittini, 2024). Gibson had been threatening legal action against the Japanese imports for some time prior to taking action.
Prior to the scheduled court date, Ibanez had already changed the headstock design on its guitars, which negated the premise of the lawsuit moving forward. Gibson and Ibanez reached an out-of-court settlement, and the lawsuit was dropped (Adirondack Guitar, 2019). The actual lawsuit itself had little effect on Japanese production, however the mid-1970's became known as the "Lawsuit Era" for vintage Japanese guitars.
It is important to note that the Japanese-made copies of the US brands at the time, such as Gibson, Fender, Martin, and others did bear a striking resemblance to the famous models, but significantly differed in construction and components. Japanese guitars looked very similar but were typically made of plywood and the internal electronics were significantly different in design and construction. This manufacturing enabled Japanese guitars to remain extremely cost-effective in comparison to the US brands. While cheaper in construction, the Japanese copies played and sounded very good in comparison to the US models. Meanwhile, the major US guitar makers were experiencing a decline in the quality of their own manufacturing, but their prices remained high. These push-pull factors drew a significant interest in the cheaper, but seemingly quality alternatives flooding the market from Japan. US guitar makers were losing revenue, and despite concerns, rumors, and threats in the mid 1970's, only one lawsuit was actually filed in relation to this trend (Anbar, 2023).
The lawsuit did have a broader impact on Japanese manufacturing as a whole. While actual legal action was in fact minimal, many Japanese manufacturers broadened their designs to more original characteristics of the guitars they produced. Although many of the basic guitar shapes and designs resembled Gibson or Fender guitars, the arrangement of pickups, switches, pick guards, headstocks, tuning machines, bolt-on necks, and other features deviated from the US designs. This not only avoided any other potential legal action, but also brought Japanese designs forward into their own unique market offerings and began to establish an identity all their own (Adirondack Guitar, 2019). This paved the way for some truly radical Japanese guitar designs in the late 1970's and early 1980's, which were popular especially with the rise of the 80's metal era.
Another effect of the Japanese guitar infusion to the US market at that time was for US manufacturers to finally recognize the need for a more cost-effective alternative to their signature offerings. The famous lawsuit was a temporary measure, but Gibson (and Fender, among others) also changed their posture toward their own lineups. Around that same time (mid to late 1970's), both Gibson and Fender invested in their own Asian manufacturing. Gibson bought Epiphone and produced Japanese-built copies of their own Gibson designs, and Fender did the same with the Squier brand (Adirondack Guitar, 2019). Both of these brands continue to offer budget-friendly direct-copies of the famous US models to this day, and both are authorized to do so under license by their parent brands. In time, both of these companies moved production to other Asian countries such as China, Korea, and Indonesia to further cut cost of manufacturing. The impacts of the Japanese import guitars of the 1960's and 1970's forever change the landscape of the global guitar market.
Many of the Japanese guitar factories of the lawsuit era went out of business as cheaper manufacturing could be found elsewhere. The vintage guitars of that era that were manufactured in Japan have now become collector's items of today (Adirondack Guitar, 2019). In many cases, these guitars were manufactured with a quality much higher than many modern Chinese, Korean, or Indonesian counterparts and the "Made in Japan (or MIJ)" aspect of vintage guitars has become an attractive selling point on the vintage guitar market. They are also becoming rarer, as most of the MIJ production slowed in the mid to late 1980's. Today, these guitars offer a true quality vintage instrument, but remain at affordable prices.
What is a "Lawsuit Guitar"
To technically qualify as an actual "Lawsuit Guitar," an instrument must be the one named in the actual lawsuit. The guitar must have been manufactured under the Ibanez name as an "Ibanez Super Standard Les Paul" copy and possess the "open book" style headstock (Adirondack Guitar, 2019). The models named in the lawsuit were produced only between June of 1977 and February of 1978 (Great Lawsuit-Era Guitars That Aren’t Les Paul or Strat Copies, 2023) per the legal documents. However, Ibanez had already changed their headstock design to deviate from the Gibson copied design by that time.
There were numerous brands being produced by Japanese manufacturers from the 1960's to the 1980's, many of which also possessed that style of headstock. Many others were close copies of other guitars such as those manufactured by Fender, Martin, and other Gibson designs. These would technically not qualify as "lawsuit" guitars, as they did not fall within the specified make/model of the lawsuit.
Most connoisseurs of vintage guitars refer to this general time period of Japanese guitar production as the "lawsuit era," (up to around 1976) and the term broadly applies to Japanese made guitars of this time that closely resemble famous US brands. Japanese manufacturers were also developing their own unique designs that did not resemble the US models, and these are typically excluded from the "Lawsuit Era" category, despite the timeframe in which they were produced (Great Lawsuit-Era Guitars That Aren’t Les Paul or Strat Copies, 2023).
At Black Sheep Music Equipment, we define the term "lawsuit era" in reference to vintage guitars as any Japanese made guitar built in 1975 or before, and that closely resembles a Gibson with the "open book" headstock. We recognize a distinction between an actual "lawsuit guitar" (actual Ibanez instrument specified in the lawsuit) and "lawsuit era" (regarding the timeframe and trend of Japanese copies of famous US brands). We are aware that there is much debate among the guitar community about this term, and we offer this as our own definition of these terms.
Gibson Lawsuit Document, June 9, 1977.
Photo credit: (Benedittini, 2024)