It’s interesting that HCU’s lawyers argue one way one time and the exact opposite the next. Could it be that they’re only interested in their own profit?
<< Bird & Bird secures landmark ruling for Fender to protect the legendary Stratocaster® design >>
I asked the AI for a summary, new assessment, and interpretation of the dispute. Here is the response:
In March 2026, Bird & Bird (Dissmann) won a case for Fender Musical Instruments before the Düsseldorf Regional Court in the dispute over the Stratocaster shape of Fender Guitars. Interestingly, the opposing side in this trial argued exactly as the HCU lawyers from Bird & Bird did in the case against PANArt: The shape is functional/descriptive, and therefore not a design eligible for protection!
Assessment of the opposing Bird & Bird argumentation (Dissmann):
1) Professional duty: Lawyers argue on a case-by-case basis, not ideologically, but according to an ‘adaptable strategy’ for their respective clients.
2) Opportunism: Bird & Bird (large law firm) maximizes client profits: Fender = big fish, HCU = idealists (lower fee?)
3) Tactics: For Fender: Prove “fame + non-functionality” (surveys, sales figures); for HCU: Reverse it – “Hang” is too generic (no burden of proof for brand recognition? Weak, as it has been refuted).
4) Interpretation: Shows trademark law as a gray area. HCU’s position (“free imitation”) fails with iconic brands; Dissmann adapts to win.
5) Contradiction: Argumentation inconsistent: Bird & Bird rejects the “monopoly argument” for HCU but upholds it for Fender.
Assessment of the strength of the new legal positions:
1) PANArt: High (70–80%), Strong evidence: 25+ years of exclusivity, consumer recognition (“Hang” = PANArt); The Fender ruling strengthens the argument for protectability.
2) HCU: Medium-low (20–30%); the “descriptive” argument is weak; “Handpan” is associated with PANArt. The Fender case shows: Well-known designs are worthy of protection, despite functionality.
Read the translated Bird & Bird publication:
Bird & Bird Secures Landmark Ruling for Fender to Protect the Legendary Stratocaster® Design
Published March 13, 2026
The international law firm Bird & Bird has secured a landmark ruling for Fender Musical Instruments Corporation (Fender) before the Düsseldorf Regional Court, confirming the legal protection of the iconic Fender Stratocaster® guitar body under German and European copyright law.
The decision establishes enforceable rights against all guitars that use the Stratocaster® body shape and are manufactured, sold, or distributed in Germany or other countries of the European Union (EU) – regardless of where these guitars are produced. This strengthens Fender’s ability to protect the design of its guitars in global trade.
The case involved electric guitars from a manufacturer and seller in China that were offered via the global online marketplace AliExpress, including for shipment to Germany. The court found that the guitars unlawfully replicated Fender’s iconic Stratocaster® body, which is considered a copyright-protected work of applied art under German and European law. The Düsseldorf Regional Court recognized that the Stratocaster® body design is to be regarded as a copyright-protected work of applied art, as it constitutes an outstanding, independent creative achievement that clearly reflects the personality of its creator.
The decision is consistent with a growing number of rulings in the EU and Germany that recognize that iconic product designs can enjoy copyright protection – beyond traditional design rights. Crucially, offering infringing products for sale in Germany or other EU countries is sufficient to establish liability, regardless of where the manufacturer or seller is based.
The decision also strengthens the protection of designs that have played a defining role in music culture since the Stratocaster® was introduced in 1954. “This landmark decision not only affirms the creative originality of the Stratocaster® guitar but also highlights the outstanding work and expertise of the Bird & Bird team throughout the proceedings,” said Aarash Darroodi, General Counsel & Chief Administrative Officer of Fender Musical Instruments Corporation. “Their strategic advice was instrumental in this important victory, which reaffirms our commitment to protecting iconic Fender designs and promoting fair competition in Europe.”
Fender Musical Instruments Corporation was advised by the following Bird & Bird attorneys: Partner Dr. Richard Dissmann (lead) and Associate Dr. Laura Jones (both IP/Trademark/Copyright, Munich).
Read the original (german) Bird & Bird publication here:
https://www.twobirds.com/de/news-and-deals/2026/germany/bird-and-bird-erstreitet-wegweisendes-urteil-fuer-fender-zum-schutz-des-stratocaster-designs