The Klon Wars (pt.1): Behringer Taunts Guitar Pedal Icon Bill Finnegan, Who Responds with Trade Dress Lawsuit

My Hot Take: Time for Behringer to Step Up and Settle

Behringer needs to settle this case or be okay with losing a lot of money. Here’s why you need to bring in IP counsel at the product design stage! Read on. Here’s the complaint.

Quick Facts:

Bill Finnegan started making his Klon Centaur pedals in the early 1990s. The Klons were (and are) considered to be the holy grail for luscious overdrive that does not require the user to push their amp to impossibly loud levels. More on how he did this can be found in this article: https://www.guitarworld.com/gear/effects-pedals/klon-centaur-explainer

You Get What You Pay for with a Centaur 

This guy hand-wires every single Centaur and intentionally limits the supply to adhere to his ethos of perfection. On the secondary market, these older handmade pedals go for thousands, sometimes, $10,000+ depending on the serial number. The newer pedals aren’t cheap either and are normally gobbled up by folks like John Mayer, Jeff Beck, Matt Schofield, among other rock icons. (You’d be hard-pressed to find one at a local band’s show.) 

Suspended Use but Retained Mark & Trade Dress 

Here’s one weird thing about this case. According to the Complaint (Para 27) (emphasis mine): “In early 2002, Finnegan suspended use of the original and modified CENTAUR Logo, and future units sold did not contain either Centaur Logo, but continued to retain the Centaur Mark and all other aspects of the Centaur Trade Dress (the “Current Centaur Pedal”), as shown here”:

Images from complaint. Case 1:25-cv-11580-NMG Document 1 Filed 05/30/25

But then here comes Behringer (owned by the Defendants) …

Images from complaint. Case 1:25-cv-11580-NMG Document 1 Filed 05/30/25

Klon Clones & Cease-and-desists

Known emulator Behringer decides to make a Klon clone, shown above. Behringer also makes dozens of brazen admissions online that it is copying someone else’s work. They even use Mr. Firth’s photo in a couple advertisements.

After multiple rounds of C&D letters and takedown notices online to eBay and elsewhere, Mr. Firth files suit alleging a number of claims, that I’ve condensed down a bit.

I’ve ranked my perception of the claims’ strength on a scale of 1-5 

1. Trademark Counterfeiting. Strength 4/5
2. Registered Trademark Infringement over Centaur: Strength:4/5
3. Passing Off/Unfair Competition/False and Misleading Representations. Strength: 4/5
4. Common Law Trademark Infringement for the Centaur Logo. Strength: 1/5
5. Unauthorized Use of a Name Image, Likeness. Strength: 3/5

What the Courts Consider 

Courts review a lot of factors to determine trademark infringement. See, e.g., Polaroid Factors for the First Circuit:

1. The similarity of marks
2. The similarity of the goods (or, in a service mark case, the services)
3. The relationship between the parties’ channels of trade
4. The juxtaposition of their advertising
5. The classes of prospective purchasers
6. The evidence of action confusion
7. The defendant’s intent in adopting its allegedly infringing mark
8. The strength of the plaintiff’s mark.

Factors are a Framework, not a Math Problem

Pignons S.A. de Mecanique de Precision v. Polaroid Corp., 657 F.2d 482, 487 (1st Cir. 1981). Courts do not simply add up who wins the most factors. Rather, these factors provide a framework for analysis.

Personally, I believe Mr. Finnegan should win and get his attorneys’ fees back. To be clear, I use Behringer gear, but this is outright disrespectful in my opinion. All that said, how might the defense address the Polaroid factors?

The Defense 

1. Yep. They’re similar. [Behringer shouldn’t waste time arguing this factor]
2. Yep. They’re similar. [Behringer shouldn’t waste time arguing this factor]
3. Yep. They’re similar. BUT you will never see a “true” Klon in Guitar Center or any other “big box” store. Klons are boutique pedals that everyone knows are handmade. Different channels.
4. Finnegan does almost no advertising. Behringer has an unlimited budget and is everywhere. Different ways of advertising.
5. Purchasers? Lucky professionals and folks with too much money will buy the original Klon. Everyone else who can’t afford the original would buy a clone of a Klon. This suggests different markets.
6. The complaint did highlight a lot of perceived confusion of sponsorship. And maybe it would confuse a casual pedalboard onlooker from afar. But honestly NOBODY will buy a Behringer pedal thinking it’s an original Klon.
7. Woof. The facts here aren’t good for Behringer. They are pretty transparent about how they’re ripping off the original.
8. Mr. Finnegan has strong recognition that ironically might end up harming his trademark case because people know how rare his pedals are. So this might harm his trademark infringement claim, but this does support his claim for false endorsement under Section 43(a).

Again, I’m only talking about “likelihood of confusion,” not unscrupulous business practices. This trademark case might not be as clear-cut as it seems at first because of the vastly different price points between the two pedals.

The Big Question: Did Bill Finnegan abandon his rights to his logo?  

Trademark Abandonment under 15 USC 1127 says a mark shall be deemed to be “abandoned” if either of the following occurs: 

1. When its use has been discontinued with intent not to resume such use. Intent not to resume may be inferred from circumstances. Nonuse for 3 consecutive years shall be prima facie evidence of abandonment. “Use” of a mark means the bona fide use of such mark made in the ordinary course of trade, and not made merely to reserve a right in a mark.
2. When any course of conduct of the owner, including acts of omission as well as commission, causes the mark to become the generic name for the goods or services on or in connection with which it is used or otherwise to lose its significance as a mark. Purchaser motivation shall not be a test for determining abandonment under this paragraph.

Mr. Finnegan will have to demonstrate he’s had legitimate use and/or intent to resume the use of the centaur logo to keep this aspect of his case alive. It seems like he simply stopped use of the logo in early 2002 and never resumed. Abandonment is always a messy fact pattern so I hope he has a war chest built up for discovery.

Stay tuned for the weird turns in this dispute!