ilovefuzz.com

The new art/name will be available as soon as we can get the enclosures done from our vendor. Then they will go out to all the dealers, probably after we sell the first batch directly.

As far as the trademark shit, we might be able to fight it, but they filed for a trademark opposition last fall (without telling us) so that when it was approved, they would have the trademark extended from their amp to the pedal. If we had trademarked it, they wouldn't be able to do this. Lesson learned. Also learned that it is expensive as fuck to trademark shit.

As you can tell, ben is more positive about this than I am, but then again, I like to fight : )

Time for a repost.



Dwarfcraft > Bogner.

unfortunately I don't have CONTROL of that image, so I cannot stop it from being posted all ove the internet forever and ever. Shame.

since shiva has been a thing for ages and ages. isnt it like a public domain thing? like classical music? how can u trademark something that has been a part of a religion for thousands of years?

My thoughts exactly!
Though honestly I must say I like the new name and artwork way more, so in my opinion it's a win.

^same here. i am moreso just curious for curiousity sake

Dr. Sherman Sticks M.D. wrote:since shiva has been a thing for ages and ages. isnt it like a public domain thing? like classical music? how can u trademark something that has been a part of a religion for thousands of years?

From my "vast" (meaning, very little) knowledge, the name is trademarked with the product in question, which was originally an amp and now a pedal as well. Prior to Bogner's pedal, there wasn't any issue because no one was going to confuse a Shiva pedal with a Shiva amp. But now that they DO have a pedal that can be confused with Dwarfcraft's....

Yeah, they could fight it. But the reality also is that Bogner probably has more money for a legal battle if it came down to it.

This change won't hurt you guys - I think it's a good call.

bognor will have to deal with a shit ton of angry customers returning pedals that do not make them sound PRO AS FUCK!

did they offer you a couple of free amps in return of being a nice guy ?

HA, I wish. Should have pushed for that.

magiclawnchair wrote:bognor will have to deal with a shit ton of angry customers returning pedals that do not make them sound PRO AS FUCK!

This, a thousand times.

I want to drop this caveat emptor to all Boggins forums and shit but I'm not sure it's any good.

I also think it's weird that you can trademark a name that you did not come up with (e.g. Shiva), while every pedal manufacturer can use the terms "delay," "reverb," "distortion," "overdrive," et al. If you can't own words that are specific to your market, why should you be able to do it to something you just borrowed from culture.
I understand brand names being TM'd, but not names of specific models.
E.G. I shouldn't be able to make a Fender amp, but if I want to put one out called The Hot Rod, who cares. Originality shouldn't be legislated.

Meanwhile, if I want to release a pedal that's exact clone of the Dwarfcraft Shiva and call it the Gnomebuilt Eva, I'll be fine. Probably. Other than Aen smacking me with a long-scale Telecaster.

That does stink, but I'm glad that you're handling it with such aplomb.

And hey... If this results in a new Dwarfcraft pedal demo, that's never a bad thing. Those demos make my week!