Ford is suing companies for use of Mustang name?

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 [email protected]

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...
 
  • Sponsors (?)


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.
 
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 :flag:
 
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 :flag:

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
 
Hmmm.... Shame on you Ford, for allowing your Lawyers to Bite the hand that feeds them! Maybe you should be way more concerned with Law suits that should be filed against FMC for the Spark-Plug Blowout Problem that all of your motors have between '97 and 2005! Shame on you! Bye the way, I'm currently frustrated because my "Super-Duty"? spit out another one yesterday, which So far has resulted in a four hour trip, $225 Tow, and two days of work lost, before I can pay for this required repair on Monday! Strike Two, Ford!
:nonono:
 
I think that the only pull they have is over businesses that deal in parts or information for the Ford Mustang. Even then they allow the use of the name as long as it has terms in the names such as "vintage" or "classic". I just wondered about the colleges and high schools that have "Mustangs" as their team name? Are they in trouble as well?
 
So on top of trying to turn the 50th anniversary M-U-S-T-A-N-G (I don't want to get in trouble too!) into some little over priced Euro-compact tuner car, Ford now wants to stomp all over the cult following that is the 'stang aftermarket? Do they not realize the ones they are going to hurt are their most loyal customers? How else would one car survive for nearly 50 years if it weren't for companies like Mustang Plus and Mustangs Unlimited that help us keep their products on the road? (Oops, I said it twice, think I'll get away with it?) :runaway: