Ford is suing companies for use of Mustang name?

Discussion in '1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-' started by jeffnoel, May 12, 2006.


  1. BlueRuckus

    BlueRuckus New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    MUSCLE MUSTANGS AND FAST FORDS. Will they get a double whammy?
    Maybe this publication should put the word out?

    In my opnion, the Ford Mustang has to be the most or one of most modified cars out there. It probably has the most aftermarket parts manufactures as well. People keep the cars, modify them, race them, put them in shows. I guess Ford considers this a BAD thing, and all the while, that little Blue Ford badge get displayed.

    Yeah, i can see where that is a bad thing. What was i thinking? :nonono:
    Really! How does this help their cause. They already got rid of 30,000 employees in one swoop cause things were sucking for them. I guess they want to drag anyone else they can with them?!

    Oh wait! Will we all get effing sued for typing Mustang on our posts?!


    Are they gonna sue the guy that wrote the song "Mustang Sally"?

    What a bunch of *ucking Idiots!
  2. rsev216

    rsev216 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Pinetop, Az
    Copyrights are to a particular market segment, in this case automotive. If you "own" the name then no one can use it for any commercial purpose in that market place without your permission. I believe there is an obligation to protect the name. The fact that Ford did nothing for 40 years might invalidate their claim.
  3. jerry S

    jerry S New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,371
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    52.22N 5.12E
    You are referring to a doctrine in Equity called "laches" which basically says that
    the passage of time combined with a change in condition would make it inequitable to enforce the claim against the defendant (in this case M+ et al). FOrd is a multi-billion dollar MNC and commands legions of flesh eating lawyers. Small fry like these vendors, even if they are 100% legally, morally, and otherwise correct, simply cannot afford to defend the case. Even if they win, they lose because they will have spent tens of millions of dollars (prolly several years of gross revenues) to get to that point. The US has a system where the loser does not have to pay the legal costs of the winner and large companies (like mine, the world's 52d largest corp) often exploit this. They simply roll over small companies like a Juggernaut, especially where they don't have to pay if they lose. Everybody blames the lawyers in these cases but it everyone forgets that it is the business men who make these decisions. I say that a lawyer is like a gun in that he is no more good or evil than the hand of the person who wields him.
  4. Cannoball888

    Cannoball888 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Gainesville, FL
    Yes, but unlike a gun, a lawyer can make a conscientous decision whether to take a case or not. People blame lawyers because many out of sheer greed will take a case even they know it is morally wrong to do so.
  5. jerry S

    jerry S New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,371
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    52.22N 5.12E
    few things in the law are black and white. Rather, there are only varying shades of grey. Only simple minded lawyers see things as black or white, morally right or morally wrong, etc. In most disputes, both sides usually have a decent argument in support of their position and a lawyer who sees the merit in a case is not a bad person for taking it. In this case, I would say that ford is probably 90% legally correct although 95% wrong in terms of making a bad business decision. You cannot fault the firm for taking the case against M+ Ford is mostly right here from a strict legal perspective. IN the professions, the practicioner should not let his own moral judgments sway whether he performs a needed service for a client although many do. For example; A pharmacist who is opposed to birth control must still dispense the next day pill.
  6. rsev216

    rsev216 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Pinetop, Az
    In this case it is a Salt Lake Law firm, not an internal (infernal) Ford lawyer. The firm probably made a pitch to some middle mangler at Ford about how much money they could bring in to Ford (while lining their own pockets). I doubt that the top people at Ford knew anything about this until the grass roots complaints started rolling in. The law firm has a big vested interest in keeping the suits going.
  7. jerry S

    jerry S New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,371
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    52.22N 5.12E
    Ford is not making any money on this or if it is, the amounts realized are de minimis for a $170 billion company. Ford is asking for $10,000 in damages from each company. After it gets done hitting Mustangs Plus, Mustangs Unlimited, Laurel Mountain Mustang, Mustang Depot, and a few others for $10k a pop, how much money at the end of the day will Ford really be adding to its bottom line?
  8. rsev216

    rsev216 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Pinetop, Az
    That is why I don't think the people at the top were even aware this was going on. Some lower level manager is looking to add this to his P/L statement expecting a promotion while the law firm keeps billing Ford $500/hr to keep it going.

    You can be sure the that it isn't a one time $10,000 payment. Ford will be looking for a regular revenue stream from annual license fees plus a cut of everything sold with "Mustang" on it.
  9. Cannoball888

    Cannoball888 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Gainesville, FL
    That is merely your own opinion. Many people would disagree with you and say a practioner should make a moral judgement. Several states and even some drugstore corporations protect a pharmacists right to refuse to dispense something that they deem morally wrong.
  10. urban96

    urban96 bubb rubb says:"woo woooooo" Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,234
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    69
    Location:
    Syracuse, NY
    boooo on ford
  11. MASHBY

    MASHBY New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary,AB
    Grow up Ford or youll be bankrupt before GM:nono:

    Guess what a buying as next car now.
    [​IMG]
  12. Jester67

    Jester67 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2004
    Messages:
    903
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    TN
    I disagree I see this as an attempt to regain the lions share of a business that they walked away from with little effort. Just think if Ford wonted to go into the replacement parts business they would own all the big names and URL’s. This would cuts down on the marketing effort don’t you think. And they could say they are doing it for the customer, assuring that all parts meet Fords standards. This would have the effect of driving the new lesser known companies like the new “mustangs plus” out of business and creating a monopoly for them as the only replacement parts vendor for the mustang while using everyone’s else’s hard work. This would also stop companies like Dynacorn from producing complete mustang bodies for sale witch would cut into there new car market. I see this as a direct attack on the enthusiast wallet and free markets. Ford had the opportunity to support the classics and chose not to. They where losing there business because they would sale crap at a premium.
  13. samishii

    samishii New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Michigan
    Lol.

    I'd go bankrupt from the insurance alone on that puppy. /cry ...
    So easy to not have money these days.:(
  14. 69MachLady

    69MachLady New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2005
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ford Let the Legend Continue

    They already have gone after magazines and clubs. They are keeping it under wraps

    Please go to the link below and sign the petition. I intend to not only e-mail, but also send hard copy.


    http://www.petitiononline.com/ginger10/petition.html
  15. electricgreen

    electricgreen Founding Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2002
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Western NY
    Someone brought up the Shelpby thing-I wonder if that isn't the reason this bs started-ford just recently rekindled that relationship (gag). Maybe people should boycott his crap (finally). After all the bs he's pulled for a car he didn't really design (it was originally the AC Cobra, right?). I wider how long it will take him to go after Eleanor look alikes (the "other" eleanor that is) now that he won that lawsuit too (although after I thought more about this, it was her fault for casting that car instead of a Boss or something-she should have known she was using a snakes car!).

    I think this was a really bad way to promote themselves. A quick read through of this and many other threads on other forums will show that all this did was alienate loyalists. A casual ford buyer wont care-but they also might buy a honda for their kid. A loyal ford enthusiest will probably care, and go to extremes, and may never return to the brand-as well as convince casual buyers in the family to do the same.
  16. Platonic Solid

    Platonic Solid Founding Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,966
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    39
    Location:
    CT-USA
    This is yet another in a series of bad business decisions. I think the real problem here has little to do with trademark infringement and more to do with desperate last ditch attempts to regain even the slightest market share. I'm sure Japan’s weak yen policy; legacy health care and pension costs play parts in this as well. Plus, Standard and Poor's downgraded debt ratings for General Motors and Ford in May of 2005. Having their credit rating lowered to "junk bond" status makes it more expensive for them to borrow.

    I'm astounded at the narrow mindedness of a corporation that fails to see opportunity lying at their feet. They have the original tooling (or at least the original drawings) for the parts we; the classic parts consumers, desire. An effective classic parts distribution chain already exists. Rather than squash all these small American aftermarket parts suppliers, open a plant that remanufactures these parts and license existing resellers to use the Mustang name. I know I always opt for the "manufactured from original tooling" parts, even though it costs more (I'm sure I'm not alone). This could easily be a profitable win-win situation. Instead it's a PR nightmare. I'm starting to think that U.S. auto manufacturing would be better off without these bloated behemoth corporations, thus making room for the entrepreneurial spirit and ingenuity that should be guiding the market.
  17. jikelly

    jikelly Advanced Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,855
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    69
    Location:
    Lubbock Tx
    :Word:
  18. electricgreen

    electricgreen Founding Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2002
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Western NY
    Oh heck yeah! Most repop parts arent exactly a "true" fit, I'd bet original tooling parts would be way better-and a business/money making oportunity.
  19. Jester67

    Jester67 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2004
    Messages:
    903
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    TN
    They might just do that after all after that kill the competition it will be an open market .
  20. mccance

    mccance New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    lets to more.

    I believe we need to do more to get this issue out in public. The problem as many people here will attest is that what is legal is not always right. Ford may have a legal right to do this but they are going about it all wrong. We need to convince ford to change tactics. They need to license the mustang name to qualified vendors not try to harm there best supporters. We need to send letters not just to these forums but to mainstream media. The rest of the country who do not sit around reading these forums needs to know about this. I have sent letters to several mainstream media sources such as usa today, bill oreilly and several local newspapers but untill many more people start sending letters I doubt they will take notice. Ford will not listen to us untill public opinion is such that it affects there bottom line. So let's affect them. Send letters to any newspaper, tv station, Bill oreilly, or anyone else who might listen. Heck i'd even write Howard Stern if I thought he'd put it on the radio. The average person who is not a mustang enthusiest does not even know about this. That has to change

Share This Page