Earlier this month, we received news that Glock has filed a lawsuit against AirSplat. It may not actually big news nowadays, since the U.S. airsoft community is aware of the propensity of Glock to file lawsuits against airsoft companies for intellectual property violations. Glock is perhaps the most high-profile firearms manufacturer that does not license its trademarks and designs for airsoft use.

Thus, any Glock-like airsoft replica, even without the markings, as long as they carry the obvious elements of Glock designs which they zealously protect (squarish slide design), they will sue any airsoft or firearms company that releases a pistol design that bear resemblance to their design such as the case of ISSC M22. Other companies that make squarish slides for the pistols make sure that they have cut-outs near the front-end of their slides as Glock does not have those.

Glocks are popular amongst airsoft players and that is why airsoft manufacturers dare to produce Glock airsoft replicas and airsoft retailers dare peddle them --- there is a demand for Glock-like airsoft replicas. However, Glock is strict in licensing their products,  such as that there is no airsoft manufacturer that has a license to manufacture airsoft Glocks. This means that while others can buy airsoft replicas of real steel guns of other manufacturers that avoid licenses by not including trademarks, which WE Airsoft is a prime example, no one can do that with Glock products. Glock has protected its designs by having trademarked the actual design, and trademarks, unlike copyrights and patents, do not have expiration dates; and thus, cannot become public domain. Glock can own the trademark indefinitely by always renewing their affidavit of use/excusable non-use of trademark and applying for renewal in accordance to the Trademark Act.

But why does Glock not license its design for airsoft use? That's a question many airsoft players want to ask, since it does make business sense for Glock to license its design. They just need to sit back and wait for the money to trickle in. Airsoft can become one of the more consistent revenue streams for the company.

The reason, according to experts cited by the World Trademark Review, is about the image that Glock would like to send across. They want to make a positive image and thus are on the lookout to prevent the use of Glock designs in airsoft pistols given the politically-charged debate on gun violence in the U.S… "Dennis Prahl, partner at Ladas & Parry, suggests that there may be wider considerations at play for the gun manufacturer:

Given the current political debate in the United States surrounding the illegal use of guns for random violence in movie theatres, schools, malls and houses of worship, GLOCK might also have a public relations interest in keeping toy versions of its products out of the hands of children. They may also feel a civic obligation to ensure that these GLOCK replicas are not acquired and used in criminal settings."

Which is expounded further on by Sasha Strauss of Innovation Protocol in the same article:

“Their trade is weapons, and like tobacco, no matter how good of a job the product does, it's often seen by outsiders as worth disparaging. But a GLOCK is a serious device. If GLOCK lets toy guns exist, they could be used as realistic props in hostage situations, inciting fire fights where no real weapon is in play. Here GLOCK has a civic duty to its constituents to keep its designs tied to real weapons - in turn, minimising confusion and mitigating potential PR battles. GLOCK's message should be of that variety - one its core brand customers can get behind and respect.”

You as an airsoft player, may or may not subscribe to whatever reason of Glock's protection of its brand image. But, that's how the company sees itself. Given incidents of children (and adults) using airsoft guns to intimidate, for crime, or getting shot by the police for carrying realistic looking replica firearms in public, Glock doesn't want any of it.

My opinion is that Glock may not exactly succeed at such image protection as firearms are seen as dangerous devices, which they in fact are, especially when not handled properly. No matter what PR work they will do, a Glock pistol is a firearm, and a firearm is something used to cause bodily harm, even death. That is the image that people see of a Glock or whatever firearm that comes to their mind. I would rather suggest that they should welcome the use of Glock designs in airsoft.

Glock should accept rather than deny that there is a demand for Glock airsoft replicas as there are many in proliferation that are made in the Far East, especially outside the U.S. They are losing potential revenue in terms of licensing their designs. Also, they lose potential customers of their products as a good number of airsoft players also make a transition from airsoft to real steel and they will always go for the firearms that they are used to using in airsoft. A familiarity with the operations of an airsoft Glock makes it easier for them to understand the operation and safety features of the real Glock pistol when they start doing some real steel training. They just don't know they have already lost a potential customer with such refusal to license their designs to airsoft.

Oh well. The good thing is that there are always choices in a market. Even without official Glock designs in airsoft, there are official "Glock-like" designs available such as the Lonewolf Timberwolf and the ISSC M22 which are fully licensed by these companies to their selected airsoft manufacturers. Not exactly Glock airsoft pistols, but they are as closest as they can be without having the guilt of violating the intellectual properties of Glock.