[bnickel]

Originally Posted by StangDreamin'

Unfortunately, that's the way of the market these days. You have to look beyond the brand name and whether it was made in "Meximericanada" (Thank you, Glenn Beck) of Chinese parts; look beyond that to the quality of the product.

I have always loved "my" Fords; but that Big Dog which may someday replace my F150 is right now a tossup between the Dodge/Cummins and the Silverado/Sierra HD with the Isuzu Marine based Duramax. The Powerstroke presently is not in the picture because Ford and Navistar are too busy flailing at one another to concentrate on delivering a quality product (IMHO). Besides; have you looked at an '07-'08 SuperDuty? They've become the front-runner in defining the term "FUGLY!" (a title previously held by the '04-'06 Chebbie Truck).

With Toyotas and Nissans being built in Texas, Tennesee and (one of the Carolina's) of partially Japanese/partially U.S./partially European parts, and me looking at a Sanden A/C compressor to replace the broken "lawnmower engine" York/Tecumseh unit in the Coog (not to mention my wife's product of the Daimler/Chrysler machine); I can't realistically scream "Buy American" anymore. Now, the "Country of Origin" doesn't matter as much as the finished product; because that's what my paycheck buys, and what my paycheck pays to maintain.

This has absolutely nothing to do with my own employer's "outsourced" Tech Support group. When a Broadband customer (who has no clue how "what he just bought" works), needs help; it would be good to have him talking to somebody for whom English is not a second language! When I get the pleasure of speaking to "Duayne in Boise" and I just know I'm hearing a camel barking in the background; even I lose confidence

ahh yes the "NEW" AT&T....gotta love it.

[StangDreamin']

Originally Posted by bnickel

ahh yes the "NEW" AT&T....gotta love it.

Gonna drift to answer this:

We're not "AT&T" -yet! But it may well be coming. The first CEO we had when they painted a big blue Q on my shirt was a former CEO of AT&T. Since he's been thrown out (and it now coming up with creative excuses to the 4th Circuit Court as to why he shouldn't go to jail); we had a CEO that was most known for cleaning up Ameritech to be sold to SBC. That guy was replaced by a guy known for selling PacBell to SBC. Anybody besides me see where this is going?

Now SBC also bought AT&T; and is now using that as their trade name (which I'm sure bnickel knows, considering where he lives). Over in California, I've seen the formerly PacBell trucks with their SBC stickers taken off and now carrying AT&T stickers. With the CEO shuffle my company has gone through; I wonder how long it will be efore my truck gets it's 3rd set of stickers?

[electricgreen]

Ah...A T & T. HSBC outsourced to India as well. Freakin annoying.

And I Meant PM, not IM in my last post. Duh. Got those shops up as soon as I got home, turned out better than I thought.

[bnickel]

Originally Posted by StangDreamin'

Gonna drift to answer this:

We're not "AT&T" -yet! But it may well be coming. The first CEO we had when they painted a big blue Q on my shirt was a former CEO of AT&T. Since he's been thrown out (and it now coming up with creative excuses to the 4th Circuit Court as to why he shouldn't go to jail); we had a CEO that was most known for cleaning up Ameritech to be sold to SBC. That guy was replaced by a guy known for selling PacBell to SBC. Anybody besides me see where this is going?

Now SBC also bought AT&T; and is now using that as their trade name (which I'm sure bnickel knows, considering where he lives). Over in California, I've seen the formerly PacBell trucks with their SBC stickers taken off and now carrying AT&T stickers. With the CEO shuffle my company has gone through; I wonder how long it will be efore my truck gets it's 3rd set of stickers?

qualcom? for some reason i thought you were with AT&T.

[StangDreamin']

Originally Posted by bnickel

qualcom? for some reason i thought you were with AT&T.

Qwest.

(Probably) Soon to be part of SBC (now known as AT&T).
Or maybe Verizon.
Who can tell anymore? Does it matter We'll still be the same guys trying to push broadband down the same 40+ year old corroded wires.

[StangDreamin']

I'm ready to blow an aneurism over this one.....

Got this off the Sandhills M****ng Club (Fayetteville/Raeford,NC) webpage; where I visit pretty much daily since it went online abot the tme Tink moved to Ft Bragg. Tink and SVTCobra306 are both members; so, here comes "The Dad" trotting along behind.....

If you guys think F**d went too far before; how about chasing after a little local club????

LINK


Personally; I'd like to be one of the "Sooper-Dooper Mega-Millions Powerball Lottery" winners; just so I could build up a Dynacorn '67 FB with a Dart block and Richmond tranny, then offer up pics of the completed project. When F**d's lawyers dropped a cease-and desist letter on me; I'd direct my Beverly Hills Daimler/Chrysler-driving fat cat lawyers to send F**d's lawyers preliminary settlement papers for my pending lawsuit for 5 digits in actual and 6 or 7 digits in punitive damages for impinging on my legal right to display my bought-and-paid-for property! There would also be 72 hour response deadline; after which I believe copies of said preliminary settlement offer would be distributed to each and every musclecar rag and cable show that I could find on Google!

They freakin' sell cars to enthusiasts and then threaten to sue said enthusiasts for showing them off!!!

Yesyesyes; I know..... the club was going to profit from the sale of calendars showing off members' cars. The membership bought the cars, the membership spent major bucks upgrading and improving the cars; but the membership can't gain anything from the money they spent on the cars????

The stupid Alpha Hotels at F**d refuse to consider that this group just out-of-the-blue gave F**d untold dollars'worth of FREE ADVERTISING!!! What a bunch of Foxtrotting jerks!

The vehicles' name is M****g; but the corporate legal shenanigans are HORSE S**T

Phew! Glad to get that off my chest! I need to take a few slow deep breaths.
And maybe half a bottle of Jack Daniels'.
The folks at Brown-Foreman don't mind if their major product's name is mentioned in a Public Forum - as long as it's spelled properly and not used in a derogatory manner
The corporate cretins at the U.S.' 3rd-largest auto manufacturer (Oops, my bad - Toyota took that slot from them and they're now #4 for some strange reason) maybe should get a clue from B-F!

[Edbert]

Saw some TV commercial last night...was for the latest miracle-cure drug that just might cause your kids to grow webbed feet...don't remember the product was barely paying attention...only reason I even noticed was there was this nice early model Stang (ooops, can I write that word?) on it...found it sad that the pharmaceutical company was (probably) forced to remove the running pony from the corral in order to show the smiling patient driving into the driveway though...real Foxtrot-Uniform-Charlie-Kilo'ed up eh?

I'm wondering how Stangnet has survived.

[jikelly]

Originally Posted by Edbert

I'm wondering how Stangnet has survived.

Me too.

[StangDreamin']

Wow! Re-reading my previous post, I was amazed at how much the this whole topic (still) incenses me. For those of you think my typing is horrible (and I agree that it is); please understand that the typos still present in my previous post amounted to about 2% of all the typos I originally made in that post - I blasted through the original draft in about 2 minutes; and was still so "irritated" that i just didn't catch them all while "proofing" it

This afternoon, I spent quite a bit of time (1 hour + ) wading through the burgeoning thread (even Andy's and Heather's relationship didn't garner 758 posts in 6 days!) on the Black M****ng Club webpage; it appears as though F**D was actually after cafepress -which I'm sure electricgreen could better describe than I.
Regardless; Ford's responses have been pretty dogged in their assertions that they own all rights to "the specific likeness of their product" meaning the shape and features of the vehicle that they sold to an original owner. Now IMNSHO, if they own the "likeness" of my pickup, they pretty much own the pickup; and therefore I believe they should pay for it! Else we could enter into discussions determining whether "Theft" or "Embezzlement" would be the appropriate legal charge for coercing me to pay $21,105 (cash and trade equity down and the remaining amount subsequently financed) for a three-year-old truck that apparently I do not own! While I'm at it, maybe F**D would like to reimburse me for the cost of maintaining, licensing and insuring their F150 for the last two years, as well. Just a thought......

Anywayzzzzzzzz; it was requested by the Founder of BMC that those of us who linked to the original thread please come back and give a little update indicating that the original thread is now closed and include THIS LINK to the new thread; which could be appropriately sub-titled "Where We're Going From Here".

Also there are a couple of Ford emaill addresses in "The Original Big Thread" that might be useful to anybody who would like to Weigh In on that or any other matter discussed in the thread you're now reading.

[68keyblr]

Wow, this has really gotten bad. Stang Dreamin' touched on this up above. Read and be disgusted:

http://consumerist.com/344556/ford-p...t-infringement

[StangDreamin']

For some reason, this issue just "calls me" like not very many issues do. Since I've a Brown Cougar, I don't qualify for membership in the BMC on two counts. But still the assininity (yes, that's a word) of this whole thing just blows me away.
This club is posting pictures on the Mustangs of members that have been chosen as "Outstanding" and worthy of credit. The people honored have (among other things) "personalized" their rides into show-winners; these freakin' cars are GREAT! And Ford can't figure out that they're blocking the effort of, photography, production, and distribution of some outstanding pictorial advertisement of their product! Jeeeee-zusss H Keee-rist! If I were William Clay Ford II; I'd be all over that like white on rice! "Hi! This is Bill Ford, I'd like to buy 10,000 copies of your calendar to hang in every Ford Dealership showroom in the United States".

Instead, they're pushing this whole "You own the car, but we own any pictures you ever took or plan to take of the car from us"

What a bunch of dopes!

EDIT: If I were the new CEO of Chrysler Motors, LLC; I'd be working out the press release offering "sponsorships" to every Viper, Magnum, Challenger and SRT4 Club out there, to help with the production costs of the clubs' own calendars.......

[jikelly]

This situation really bothers me. What can we do to get Ford to realize their actions are unnecessarily putting them at risk. They are already losing face and customers over it. It kinda seems as if the cafe press thing is generating a lot of buzz.

How is stangnet getting away with blatant copyright infringement?

[Edbert]

You are thinking about using logic and reason to get through to a bunch of corporate lawyers...not gonna happen.

Our only hope is to get through to some shareholders, but most of them don't give a flip about cars in any way...just another toaster-oven/appliance to them. Besides...the board of directors must be convinced that they are losing more money from not getting a royalty on a club calendar than they are from chasing away long time customers who'll be buying from another car company next time they purchase.

On a side note...I have noticed that the vendors have not changed their names yet, at least on their ads and websites. Maybe Ford has backed off from attacking them and gone after car owners who take pictures.

[jikelly]

Wow, from back in October. http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/12/h...ge-from-the-r/

[electricgreen]

Did I hear my name? lol. I was going to post on BMC, but it's sllllooowwww from all the hits they're getting.

Well, it's been a few months since my run in with F*rd. I took a deep breath and stepped back. It still p's me off. BUT, I see the legal ground they are standing on. While I have a grasp of the legal part, I still think this is a gigantic slap in the face to enthusiasts. They (F*rd) don't offer me a shirt with a big body on it. I'm not taking anything away from them by wanting one with "my" year car on it.

I still say the new Challanger looks DA-UMN good to me as a possible new toy, and the Subaru Outback GT as a DD (yeah, I wish it was more truck than a station wagon, but the Legacy GT is one hella all around vehicle, and we need more room than a sedan gives). Were it not for this, I might have considered something from FOMOCO. I know, I know, I shouldn't stop supporting them because they are legally protecting their rights. Heck, sports fans drop their team for a bad season, I have every right to drop them on their ample rears for treating enthusiasts with as little respect as they have. Why should I stay loyal? What are they doing for me? I would feel bad for the low folks on the totum pole of F*rd went under, but the upper folks can go you know where and I wouldn't care. They drove the company to it's sorry state-reap what you sow. Besides, they never built the 49 or Bronco, so they don't have much of anything I want anyway!

I am going to be closing the EGMR soon. I'm not helping polish the blue oval for them if they are going to fight me promoting my site (my merchandise was also removed from Cafepress). I don't have the $$ that the BMC has to have lawyers fight the fight for me-I'd rather just close it up before I get some letter demanding compensation for using M-stng in my site url and name. This in no way tarnishes my love for my Mustangs. I will take heart in the fact that I bought them both used so "they" didn't make a penny from me

Hey, someone from F*rd just posted on the consumerist blog. Interesting.

[reenmachine]

Look, here's what I think the the real underlying business reason is for them doing this. It's doesn't make the turd taste any better but at least there's a kernel of logic behind it. It's still a situation of alienating your base for a short-term payoff.

As we all know, Ford isn't exactly in a strong position financially these days. Giant corporations, like the rest of us, are constantly borrowing money and have to keep after their credit rating such that it is.

Loans are secured by assets -- there has to be some sort of collateral that has tangible value.

Ford doesn't have a lot left to borrow against that isn't already in hock, so they're constantly looking for a new angle.

Right now, they appear to be borrowing money against their intellectual property. The only way to convince a lender to make that loan is to demonstrate that that intellectual property indeed has value and will continue to into the future. Part of this demonstration is to show that you are vigorously defending said intellectual property against dilution. Allowing unlicensed products into the marketplace dilutes the value of Ford's intellectual property and thus makes it more difficult to borrow money.

So, it's not as simple as Ford being strapped for cash and thus wanting to squeeze pennies out of licensing a few hundred calendars or whatever. It's part of the bigger picture strategy of continuing to be able to borrow the vast sums they must to continue in business. They can't make very much off of their entire licensing program -- it's the appearance of defending their brand that makes them money. I'm sure there are some within the corporation that realize it blows to step on their core following but see it as a necessary evil in order to plod along for another day.

I'm certainly not defending their actions, just pointing out that there's probably a deeper wrinkle to this than what's on the surface.

[rsev216]

Somebody must be listening! See Ford response: http://www.bmcforums.com/showthread.php?t=42820

[jikelly]

Seems BMC is going to get to make their calendar. Maybe not with Cafe Press, but they have permission from Ford to produce it now.

Well, I'm glad that someone from Ford thought it'd be good to make this right. Now what we need from them is an official announcement of their policy towards enthusiast websites, club materials, and forums on what is and what is not allowed in publishing/reproducing/sharing images of their vehicles.

Further I'd love it if they actually would offer, and make public, a reasonable licensing arrangement to the many small businesses that use their images, name and logo in some form or fashion.

[bnickel]

Originally Posted by reenmachine

Look, here's what I think the the real underlying business reason is for them doing this. It's doesn't make the turd taste any better but at least there's a kernel of logic behind it. It's still a situation of alienating your base for a short-term payoff.

As we all know, Ford isn't exactly in a strong position financially these days. Giant corporations, like the rest of us, are constantly borrowing money and have to keep after their credit rating such that it is.

Loans are secured by assets -- there has to be some sort of collateral that has tangible value.

Ford doesn't have a lot left to borrow against that isn't already in hock, so they're constantly looking for a new angle.

Right now, they appear to be borrowing money against their intellectual property. The only way to convince a lender to make that loan is to demonstrate that that intellectual property indeed has value and will continue to into the future. Part of this demonstration is to show that you are vigorously defending said intellectual property against dilution. Allowing unlicensed products into the marketplace dilutes the value of Ford's intellectual property and thus makes it more difficult to borrow money.

So, it's not as simple as Ford being strapped for cash and thus wanting to squeeze pennies out of licensing a few hundred calendars or whatever. It's part of the bigger picture strategy of continuing to be able to borrow the vast sums they must to continue in business. They can't make very much off of their entire licensing program -- it's the appearance of defending their brand that makes them money. I'm sure there are some within the corporation that realize it blows to step on their core following but see it as a necessary evil in order to plod along for another day.

I'm certainly not defending their actions, just pointing out that there's probably a deeper wrinkle to this than what's on the surface.

Pete, i have a tendancy to agree with what you're saying, however, if that truly is the case Ford needs to make a public statement on why they are doing what they are doing and for what reason so that people will understand and (possibly) support what they are doing. as it is they are sneaking around behind the enthusiasts' back and making all of us very nervous about what our hobby will be like in the future and also what this mess is doing to the value of our cars. i've been closely watching mustang prices lately and i've noticed that these cars are bringing a lot less today than they about this time last year when all this BS started where other marqes are bringing a lot more money than they were EVER bringing before. it seems to me that potential buyers are staying from fords in general and mustangs in particular and the cars are noy bringing what they should be.


normally this would not bother since i've owned my car for almost 24 years now and i'd never planned on selling it, but with life sometimes being what it is i am actually going to have to sell the car once it's totally done so i can buy my family a house and knowing what my car should bring it's very disturbing to see other cars not bringing the money they should be bringing right now. hell, 67-73 cougars are now bringing almost as much money as mustangs and that has NEVER happened before EVER. i'm not going to complain too loudly because the car that will take the mustang's place in the garage will be a cougar but that's actually going to be kind of a double whammy for me since the parts for the cougars are going up as well.

i believe most people would actually suppport ford on the trademark infringement bit if they would just make a public statement and actually explain why and what for. i mean no one realy wants to see taiwanese import mustangs running around like all the taiwan and chinese copies of edelbrock intakes and danny bee belt drives out right now. i mean they are copying just about everything now and i can kind of understand ford's concern about that stuff happening to the mustang but if that is, in fact, what they are doing they are going about in completely the wrong way and it's affecting the people in the hobby in more ways than one. i also have to believe that this is affecting their new car sales as well.


just my opinion on the matter

[reenmachine]

...and I agree with you entirely.

Wouldn't that be something if a Ford PR spokesperson came out and publicly explained the whole thing, the reasoning and intent behind it, and outlined a common-sense plan for defending their intellectual property while maintaining their relationship with enthusiasts. We would all rally behind them and accept that we would have to put up with some changes and inconveniences for the greater good. I would think that would build the value of their brand beyond what it ever has been.

But what do we know...we're just dumb car guys.

[electricgreen]

Originally Posted by jikelly

Seems BMC is going to get to make their calendar. Maybe not with Cafe Press, but they have permission from Ford to produce it now.

Well, I'm glad that someone from Ford thought it'd be good to make this right. Now what we need from them is an official announcement of their policy towards enthusiast websites, club materials, and forums on what is and what is not allowed in publishing/reproducing/sharing images of their vehicles.

Further I'd love it if they actually would offer, and make public, a reasonable licensing arrangement to the many small businesses that use their images, name and logo in some form or fashion.

I'm sure they will be able to use cafepress if they choose to. Cafepress has a notation in their TOS which allows for images such as the mstng photos in question to be used if the shopkeeper can show they have the legal right to do so, which the BMC now has.

I agree. I did close up the EGMR site last night. I just can't take the chance, dispite what has happened with this, that they might change thier minds like they did in the case of that aftermarket supplier which had their blessing for years to use the mstng name but ended up served with a C&D and a 10K lawsuit. And I just don't have the time to persue getting a legal ok from them, much less the money for a lawyer to make sure that what they give me really and truely is a legal and binding document. It would also be nice if they made contact info available and easily located for clubs to get the official ok without needing to involve a lawyer like the BMC did.

I REALLY agree with this one. I'd dearly love to offer some photos I have on products through cafepress that feature mstngs. I created a poster for my DH using a pic of Eleanor-I got the poster ordered luckily, but it was removed by Cafepress even thought it wasn't publically offered in my shop. I also made him a Christmas ornament with a yellow big body (and a magnet with the same image for her PO), but removed the image right after I received them so I didn't get one of the scary emails that cafepress sends! But without knowing how much I would make, or even if I would make anything, I wouldn't be able to afford much in the way of fees for licensing. I would take a chance on a small fee, but I'm willing to bet what it is now is WAY more than I would risk on it. Not that there's contact info out there everywhere to even ask them, lol.

[electricgreen]

Roflmao, I decided to see if Mr. im-from-ford had any contact info. Well, no, but I did see this and think it was funny:

Whitney Drake's Friends:

Whitney Drake has no friends.

[StangDreamin']

Well, you guys all beat me to it, 'cause I went straight from work to a Rodeo meeting (at 7:40PM); to home and leftover cold supper(1025PM); to the beer fridge(1035PM); to bed last night(1100PM); and never even looked ia my laptop! Finally got on at 730 tonight; and HOLY COW!!! "There is intelligent life on this planet, Captain!"

As I mentioned in my response to the thread that rsev216 linked; I love the verbiage in "Whitney's" post. Very different from the "Official Ford Motor Company" statements that had been linked in various threads on the Calendar issue". It almost looks like some "car guys" at Ford had a little come to Jesus meeting with some of the contract (and maybe in-house) legal types regarding this whole mess; and hopefully this means that Ford will soon be somewhat of a "car enthusiast's" manufacturer once again!

[PUNISHER RACING]

desperate times call for desperate measures I guess

[bnickel]

Originally Posted by reenmachine

...and I agree with you entirely.

Wouldn't that be something if a Ford PR spokesperson came out and publicly explained the whole thing, the reasoning and intent behind it, and outlined a common-sense plan for defending their intellectual property while maintaining their relationship with enthusiasts. We would all rally behind them and accept that we would have to put up with some changes and inconveniences for the greater good. I would think that would build the value of their brand beyond what it ever has been.

But what do we know...we're just dumb car guys.

we should just start calling each other dummy, then. hey dummy how's business at your "car named for a WWII fighter plane in the spirit of the last of the wild american horses" restoration and modification shop today? ok, well i'll talk to you later dummy.


LOL