[87gn2]

What this means for me is no more Ford products.

Ever.

I'll swallow my pride and buy a Chevy before Ford gets a dime of my money.

[Edbert]

Has anything been resolved on this issue? I see all of the vendors still have their names and all. Only thing I can see anywhere are some basic disclaimers about "not affiliated with Ford Motor Company" and such.

I'm guessing someone in Dearborn with a brain called off the dogs?

[zookeeper]

There's someone in Dearborn with a brain?

[Edbert]

Originally Posted by zookeeper

There's someone in Dearborn with a brain?

Somewhere....probably...my 2005 Mustang is a really nice car...SOMEONE up there has SOME brains...right?

[StangDreamin']

Yeah, it looks like somebody somewhere deep in the bowels of Ford was looking at the internet (probably looking for more quotes to pilfer about how great the new Mustang is); found 110,659,326,748 links to the BMC calendar "problem" and went screaming through the cubicles until he found somebody in authority.

At that point there probably arose a great "OH, S#[T!!!!!!" amongst the PR-types which reverberated around the halls of Dearborn until somebody really big (maybe named "Bill"?) heard about it.

I've got one of the new calendars. It looks really nice.

[zookeeper]

Originally Posted by Edbert

Somewhere....probably...my 2005 Mustang is a really nice car...SOMEONE up there has SOME brains...right?

That's what tweaks me off, the new Mustangs are sooooooo neat, and they sell every single one they make, why do they need to hassle with people trying to keep old Mustangs alive?

[jikelly]

Glad this seems to have been resolved.

[tx65coupe]

This is BS, but all of the companies do similar things or at least try to. Shelby was doing something like this because someone made stripes or decals to replace worn out ones on for the early 80s GT 350 because they weren't available. So the decals he sold weren't licensed so he got sued. The Mustang shops just need to amend their names to meet the criteria mentioned above. They just need to add classic or vintage to thier name.

Virgina Classic/Vintage Mustang
Texas Classic/Vintage Mustang
Dallas Classic/Vintage Mustang
California Classic/Vintage Mustang
Laurel Mountain Classic/Vintage Mustang
Kentucky Classic/Vintage Mustang
Sacramento Classic/Vintage Mustang
Mustangs Unlimited Classic Parts

[stang74shelby]

Originally Posted by zookeeper

I just did a quick copy/paste, it may be a little hard to follow, but you get the idea. The funny thing is, I get the eerie feeling they have no idea whatsoever what I'm talking about!

Dear Jim,

If your local Ford or Lincoln-Mercury dealership is unable to order a
particular Ford part for you because it is unavailable, we recommend
contacting one of the below companies, as they specialize in obsolete
parts:

Green Sales
513-731-3304
Green Sales Company - Obsolete Ford parts, Lincoln, Mercury parts Green Sales Company, supplier of obsolete Ford parts and Lincoln / Mercury parts.* Our Ford parts inventory represents all Ford and Lincoln / Mercury products from 1950 to the present.

Parts Voice
800-328-8766
PartsVoice.com

In addition, the department that would best handle your inquiry
regarding Ford Mustang brand name would be our Global Brand Licensing office.

Please contact them directly at:
branduse@ford.com

or

Ford Motor Company
Global Brand Licensing Office
16800 Executive Plaza Drive
Suite 5N203
Dearborn, MI 48126
USA

Sincerely,
Eleonor Joy
Customer Relationship Center
Ford Motor Company

For online support visit us at: Ask Ford what you are looking for which contains
answers to frequently asked questions and links to other key product
and service information.

[THREAD ID:1-3BTB1F]

-----Original Message-----

From: jngzoo@yahoo.com
Sent: 2/5/2007 08:59:36 PM
To: crcfmc@ford.com
Subject: Re: Ford Motor Company

Hello Marjorie, I'm not sure how many lawsuits your company has
brought against Mustang restoration suppliers, but the one I'm
concerned with involves Ford's attack on any and all businesses with the word,
"Mustang" in the name. I really do not see any benefits for Ford in
this matter at all. In fact I see just the opposite of a financial gain,
and that is a huge financal loss. How could protecting a Ford
copyrighted name be a bad thing? This is a no-win game for Ford, and here's why:
Mustang parts suppliers started going into business about the time Ford
quit supplying parts in the late '70's and early '80's. Back then Ford
couldn't have possibly cared less about old cars, whether they were
Mustangs or not. At that particular time, Ford only cared about selling
new cars, and in my opinion, nothing's changed in that area. In 1980, a
decent '67 Mustang fastback was worth about $2,000 and the owners and
restorers of those cars
weren't even a blip on Ford's radar screen. As parts supplies dried
up, aftermarket vendors saw a need in the market and filled that need by
building and supplying Mustang restorers with the parts they needed.
Ford on the other hand was busy selling truly horrible cars like the
Pinto and Mustang II. As time went on Mustang restorers and vendors formed
a relationship that benefitted both. There were (and are) some
businesses that sell substandard parts, but savvy builders know to steer clear
of those businesses an are very helpful to newcomers to the hobby to
help them find quality parts. As time went on, years turned to
decades and our vintage Mustangs have been "discovered" the rest of the
world and prices have jumped. Now that some hypothetical 1967 fastback
Mustang that was worth $2,000 in '80 is worth ten times that today.
Like any hobby where there is money to be made, it attracts attention,
both good
and bad. The good attention is that quality parts are in high demand.
The bad is that everyone has their hand out, wanting to cash in on the
Mustang phenomenon, and that includes Ford. Where was Ford when we
needed parts 25 years ago? Where were the greedy lawyers when there was no
money to be made in the hobby? If I understand correctly,
Ford wants to eliminate any business with the word "Mustang" in it's
name. Let me ask you this question: if you own a business that caters
primarily to the Mustang industry, what would you call it? It only makes
sense to use the name of your intended customers car in the title. Ford's
position is that they would like to "protect" the consumer by allowing
the "approved" vendors to offer "official", Ford-approved parts. Sure
it is, after all Ford is only looking out for my best interest by
putting the screws to the same people that helped me restore my Mustangs for
the last 20
years, right? After all, I'm sure that Ford really has it's finger on
the pulse of the collector car hobby. If Ford wants to compete with
current suppliers, then get in line and open up shop and let the quality
of their parts speak for themselves. The only thing Ford had left was
the loyalty of Ford owners, it didn't matter if an enthusiast owned a new
Ford or an old one, a Ford was a Ford and that's all that mattered. But
the marketing guru's at Ford today took care of that, at least for me.
So my next question is, is anyone at Ford listening to the grass-roots
enthusiast? Jim
Elliott

crcfmc@ford.com wrote: Dear Jim,

Thank you for contacting the Ford Motor Company Customer Relationship
Center a Mustang lawsuit.

We would like to address this matter on your behalf. However, we are
unclear on the specific nature of the response to your previous e-mail as
you have outlined in your e-mail. Please reply to us with a
clarification of how you would like Ford Motor Company to assist you with regards
to this matter.

If you have any other inquiries, please feel free to contact us and we
will be happy to address them for you.

Sincerely,
Marjorie Anne
Customer Relationship Center
Ford Motor Company

Please visit our 24/7 on-line help service, Ask Ford what you are looking for
which contains answers to frequently asked questions and links to other
key product and service
information.

[THREAD ID:1-3BKZUZ]

-----Original Message-----

From: jngzoo@yahoo.com
Sent: 1/31/2007 08:06:17 PM
To:
Subject: Question_to_Ford_Motor_Co

Contact Us
First Name: Jim
Last Name: Elliott
Email Address: jngzoo@yahoo.com
Questions: Hi,
A few months ago, I took the time to write you with my concerns about
your pending lawsuit against the people in the Mustang-based
restoration
market. Instead of getting an answer, I was emailed a form letter
explaining nothing, but trying to justify your greed. Here's a link to
an
online forum where some die-hard Ford people have some strong opinions
about this subject. Ford is suing companies for use of Mustang name? - Mustang Forums at StangNet
Also, I hope the idiots behind this lawsuit are buying a lot of Fords.
My
wife and I will be buying a new car in a couple weeks and it sure won't
be
a Ford! The Dodge dealer has some nice products and they
aren't
crucifiying their supporters. Good Luck flushing what's left of your
company down the toilet.

How can you call Mustang II crappy cars, they are mustang also and i have smoked a few fox bodies and classic stangs with mine..... you could of used another car instead of those.Dude wtf?

[mdriggers9662]

FVIKE,you guys are right about name inventing. Mustang is a breed of horse and has been for hundreds of years. maybe the equine organizations should file suit against ford.

[03Stangr]

Originally Posted by jeffnoel

Check this out........ Ford is suing companies that use trademark names such as "Mustang" ( can I say that now? ) in their trading name. Companies such as "Mustangs Plus" are being ordered to stop using the name in all correspondence and advertising and pay $10,000 in damages.

Ford also states they may go after clubs and publications as well !!!!

Here's a link to the story. Recordnet.com: Mustang mayhem

I have copied the text here also as they have moved the story a couple times and the link may not be working.

Mustang mayhem
Stockton firm faces suit by Ford for trademark violation

MICHELLE MACHADO
Record Staff Writer
Published Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Mustangs Plus owner Ron Bramlett sits with one of the Mustangs that he provides parts for Tuesday. The Stockton parts store was ordered by Ford Motor Co. lawyers to stop using the sports car name.

STOCKTON - Mustangs Plus Inc., which has spent 25 years building up its specialty parts business under the Mustang moniker, now must tear that trademark from its business and Internet domain names or face a suit by Ford Motor Co.

Compliance with Ford's demands will negatively impact company value in the present and company sales in the future, said Ron Bramlett, a partner in family-owned Mustangs Plus at 2353 N. Wilson Way in Stockton.

"I was a young man when I started this. You work half your life and then have it ******ed," said Bramlett, 52.

Ford also is trying to protect the value of the business it has built since 1903, said Gregory Phillips, a partner in the firm that drafted the cease and desist letter.

"The courts have recognized that a trademark name such as Mustang is an important asset of Ford Motor Co.," Phillips said.

The Feb. 16 letter from Howard, Phillips and Andersen, a Utah law firm representing Ford on intellectual property enforcement matters, asked Mustangs Plus to:

» Transfer to the automaker the registration for mustangsplus.com.

» Submit to government offices all forms necessary to discontinue registration of the Mustangs Plus name.

» Cancel Internet and telephone directory listings and advertising under the Mustangs Plus name.

» Turn over for destruction all signs, banners, business cards and collateral materials.

» Issue a check to Ford for $10,000 in damages.

Since 2000, the firm has sent "hundreds" of similar letters to businesses perceived to have trampled on Ford trademarks, Phillips said.

Ford has been successful in collecting damages in most of those cases.

While most businesses settle out-of-court, about 50 lawsuits have been filed, and all of those were resolved in Ford's favor, according to Phillips.

The scope of trademark infringement actions could be widened to include publications and organizations that use Mustang and other Ford trademarks, he said.

In the 1990's, Ford sent guidelines to selected restoration parts manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers, including Mustangs Plus, authorizing the use of trademarked names as long the business name was accompanied by a qualifying word or phrase such as "vintage" or "classic."

Bramlett and his partners believed Mustangs Plus met that criteria, and a decade of silence from Ford quarters deemed confirmation.

Bramlett believes that the use of the Mustang name by those unaffiliated with Ford amounts to free advertising.

"I have to believe in those years Mustang was glad to have people use the name," Bramlett said.

That argument has been rejected by the courts, Phillips said.

Harry Pulliam, owner of Mustang and Muscle Parts in Oakdale, in the mid-1980's received a letter similar to the one recently delivered to Mustangs Plus.

"I told them a long time ago I would be willing to sell Chevy parts," he said.

Now, two decades later, a legal battle would hardly be worth his while.

"I would just quit," he said.

Intellectual property is a gray area of the law, said Gregg Meath, a Stockton attorney who teaches Internet and computer law at University of the Pacific's McGeorge School of Law.

Meath said that Mustang Plus' use of the trademark is likely fair since it is descriptive and does not imply affiliation with Ford.

"How else are they to tell people what it is they do?" he said.

But, he said, a court battle would be a "big guy vs. little guy" fight that would cost Mustangs Plus tens of thousands of dollars.

"We try to wear the white hats and be reasonable," Phillips said. "It's already bad when you have a big company come after a little company."

For now, Mustangs Plus and Ford are at a stalemate.

"We've spent some time with our attorney, who has spent some time with them. It's very costly and it's going nowhere," Bramlett said.

Phillips also voiced frustration with the lack of resolution.

"Ford is not trying to put this guy out of business. We've offered Mustangs Plus a reasonable transition period of three to six months.

Mustangs Plus partners, who include Bramlett's brother, David, will likely not sign the Ford agreement, viewing such an action as an admission of guilt,

But they have decided to rename the business using the word "restomod," a term referring to car restoration and modification that Mustangs Plus copyrighted.

The wording of the final name has yet to be ironed out, though: That decision must wait for another business to relinquish its hold on the "restomod" moniker.


Contact reporter Michelle Machado at (209) 943-8547 or mmachado@recordnet.com

This is truly unfortunate, but politics are a part of the business. I'm going to have to look into this one myself. I'm going to look this up. I have an avenue to use that may let me see what's going on. I can see the Ford side in a way. They have worked really hard to be up there with Honda & Toyota quality and reliability speaking. I think they just want to make sure that there name isn't being mislead or mistaken in any way in regards to brand issues. Sort of like the Shelby, Roush and Saleen relationships having Fords stamp of approval on paper. Of course I have not looked up the update regarding Saleen and it's specific & recent sale to MJ Acquisitions. That’s a confusing matter that’s another subject completely. I'm just glad that Steve kept the Saleen S7 department part out of it. Isn't politics fun...

[HistoricMustang]

Holy crap! Boy am I in trouble!

[Edbert]

Originally Posted by stang74shelby

How can you call Mustang II crappy cars, they are mustang also and i have smoked a few fox bodies and classic stangs with mine.....

The MII is a Pinto you know. Then again, the early Stang was a Falcon and the Foxes were really Fairmonts too...LMAO!

[bnickel]

you know ford sold as many or even more of the Mustang II's than the original cars. i can't honestly see why anyone would say they are crappy cars and they are certainly NOT pintos, they are a completely different design, though they do have some similarities and share some common components. IMHO anyone who bashes the II's has never even owned one. yes they were designed to be a sporty economy car in the crappy 70's but the original mustang was also designed to be a sporty economy car, it later morphed into a more muscular "compact" car (it was truly in the compact car class, Pintos and such are a sub compact). i owned a 78 nothback and it was definitely one the most fun cars i have ever owned.

i'll soon be looking for a nice T-top hatchback II for my daughter as her first car. i plan to build it with a turbo 2.3 from an SVO or T-Bird turbo coupe backed up by an overdrive automatic trans and an 8" rear with about a 3.40-3.50 geared trac-lok diff. should make for a nice sporty little first car that has enough power to keep up with traffic but NOT get her into trouble with it. i'll add bigger disc brakes up front and bigger drums out back with some nice 14" or 15" wheels, maybe an Ansen sprint to mimic the look of the factory slot mags. i showed her a really nice little Cobra II with T-tops at the last car show we went to and she absolutely loved it so i think one should make a great little car for her and it should be pretty economical as well.

[Edbert]

it should go without saying...but just in case...and for the record...

I am not nor would I consider insulting anyone's car. My comment had more to do with the humble nature of the Mustang line. As far as I'm concerned it is one of the aspects of the Mustang that I love the most, even up to today's wonderful SN197. The Mustang was a cheaply designed and manufactured "sporty" car that was highly affordable and highly modifiable.

Let the Camaro and Challenger guys pay $40,000.00+ for their cars that have more power. A very close friend of mine just paid $49K for an SS-RS that will smoke my daily driver,it is a beautiful and very high performance car, I just mention to him that I paid half that for mine.

So I apologize if I offended anyone or their ride, it was DEFINITELY not my intent

[bnickel]

Originally Posted by Edbert

it should go without saying...but just in case...and for the record...

I am not nor would I consider insulting anyone's car. My comment had more to do with the humble nature of the Mustang line. As far as I'm concerned it is one of the aspects of the Mustang that I love the most, even up to today's wonderful SN197. The Mustang was a cheaply designed and manufactured "sporty" car that was highly affordable and highly modifiable.

Let the Camaro and Challenger guys pay $40,000.00+ for their cars that have more power. A very close friend of mine just paid $49K for an SS-RS that will smoke my daily driver,it is a beautiful and very high performance car, I just mention to him that I paid half that for mine.

So I apologize if I offended anyone or their ride, it was DEFINITELY not my intent

actually Edbert i was replying to Zookeepers post. i knew you didn't have anything against the II's.....but i did have to correct you on the pinto thing though....LOL