Beyond that, Ford may or may not be within it’s rights tho I tend to agree with the legal profs who have pointed out the flaws in their position.

In regards to the Mustang enthusiasts they are screwing them. Ford abandoned the vintage Mustang owner over the past few decades by discontinuing pretty much the whole line of vintage Mustang parts. They’ve demanded royalties from repro manufacturers while contributing nearly nothing themselves to the hobby over the past decade. And now they are threatening companies that have been using the name for decades(legitimately according to some IP experts), publications and even clubs. This hobby and the value of the brand would be zero if not for these businesses, clubs and publications.

They are basically going after the people who have maintained the value of their trademark.

OF THE BIG THREE AMERICAN AUTOMAKERS ONLY FORD DESERVES THEIR CURRENT BAD STATE. IT COULDN’T HAVE HAPPENED TO A BIGGER NOB SUCKERS. I FOR ONE WON’T CARE IF THEY DIE SOONER THEN LATER

I for one have changed my mind to part exchange my Mercedes C55 AMG for a Dodge challenger then a ford mustang gt500 because I don’t wanna put money into a money grabbing pricks pocket no matter how good the products.

Second, you wrote: “If Toyota went after companies illegally using IP in reguards to Supra, Celica, Mrs. or MR2, etc. . . . . than [sic] I am sure that you would be praising them.”
Please don’t assume you know how I feel on any subject. In point of fact, I would not be praising anyone guilty of similar stupid and short-sighted actions.

I admit to holding very little sympathy for FoMoCo, who clearly have not in the past held IP in the high regard that you display. Perhaps you don’t know the history of FoMoCo and Robert Kearns; if not, here’s a link for you:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54564-2005Feb25.html

This is simply another case of big business “do as we say, not as we do.”

BTW, a little Google work will illustrate that the big automakers (not just Ford) have a long history of treating small companies and inventors in similar manners.

One other point: Jaguar has not been able to regulate/proscribe the use of the word “Jag” in the Jaguar parts aftermarket and I can personally assure you that they have tried.

And I am not going to get into the illegal immigration debate on this forum.

Logic, Law, and good business are not on your side.

If Toyota went after companies illegally using IP in reguards to Supra, Celica, Mrs. or MR2, etc. or Honda went after companies illegally using IP relating to NSX, S2000, Civic, CRX, etc. than I am sure that you would be praising them.

your argument: We have allowed 12-22 million immigrants to illegally cross the border into this country. Because they have not been prosecuted yet, and no additional steps have been taken to prevent future immigrants from illegally crossing, then nothing should be done.

simply because it has not been looked at to this extent in recent years, is not ample reasoning to ignore the laws surrounding IP or do dissallow the prosecution for IP violations.

It will be very interesting to see whether Ford’s bloodsuckers will be successful in going after companies using the terms “Stang” and “Pony”, as the USPTO’s TESS system does not report that either term is registered as a Ford trademark. And I sincerely doubt that Ford can support a claim of consistent use of either word.

I’m still not interested in the new Mustang, Ford. Your lawsuits over trademark aren’t making me care. Ford is stuck back in the 1960’s. Within a few years I do plan to buy another 1969 Mustang Fastback, however. I had one in high school and it’s a classic legend now as much as it was then.

Where were you, Ford, when you abandoned the technology in the 1984-86 Mustang SVO? When you declined to bring over the fully DOHC turbo Sierra RS (known here as the Merkur X4RTi– what a dumb name when you could have just called it “Sierra” on two continents). And most importantly, where were you when you decided to discontinue the independent rear suspension in the late early 2000’s Cobra?

And now you’re charging charging $50k+ for a Shelby Cobra Mustang? Hey, I’ve moved on to– sorry– better cars. No marketing magic is going to change the fact that your Mustang isn’t an icon anymore. It has become heavier. Bravo on that.

I’ll be happy with another ‘69 Mustang. Otherwise I’m still looking at Japanese sportscars.

due to the success of the new mustang, not seen on this scale in the previous 3 decades. They have a vehicle that is wildly successful with a broad range of the public in an era when the aftermarket scene grosses $25 billion per year.

This simply makes their IP cases far more public than before, when the Mustang and its aftermarket parts suppliers were not anywhere near as highly visible.

Wonder if Ford is going to demand that the Mustang Club of America change its name, too?

I suspect (but do not know) that this whole situation came about after the legal firm handling this “program” approached Ford with the idea that they could both make some bucks. It would very interesting to know just how that firm is being compensated. What do you bet that they’re splitting the “proceeds”?

What will make this a PR nightmare for Ford is that these actions will almostly certainly hurt a very large group of people who are serious Ford enthusiasts and boosters, i.e. Mustang collectors and restorers. It’s never good business intentionally to piss off your core supporters.

Concerned Mustang collectors and enthusiasts should be sending the president of FoMoCo letters or emails informing him they will not be purchasing any new vehicles from Ford and related companies so long as this idiotic attack on the Mustang vendor community continues. And then to keep that promise.

I don’t think that Ford is going to go after the legitimate companies here. They are simply doing their part to protect their IP from misuse and UNAUTHORIZED use.

you can argue these are some of their biggest and best supporters, and suing them isn’t the way to go, nor shaking them down for 5 large, but what do you expect out of IP lawyers?

that’s what they do. like terminators, that’s ALL they do. sue.

It is is evil when they are destroying the very things that make their car popular. The Mustang is a piece of popular culture, and has been since 1964. Ford couldn’t pay for the kind of publicity the Mustang gets from movies and bits of popular culture. They should be happy their car and “intillectual property” has become a stape in America. Instead they sue and sponsor Karoke contests, and they wonder why they’re heading towards the toilet?

Ford is NOT banning any/all companies from associating themselves with this car and their car company. They simply realize that the trademark infringement and proliferation has spread to an unexceptable rate and are attempting to protect their rightful assets. I assume good business is evil?

Apple is currently doing this very same thing with all third parties using the name iPod, and Paramount has for some time vigorously defended Star Trek-related terms.

The court did not “drop the ball” on Jeep vs. Hummer. It correctly decided that two former subsidiaries of the same trademark owner who now have different ownership have equal rights to the trademark, in the absence of any agreements to the contrary. SInce Chrysler did not require AMG to stop using the grille when it spun off its defense businesses, or retain sole rights to future use, Daimler has no grounds to object now, especially after the passage of so much time. The court cannot turn back time and let Daimler retroactively change Chrysler’s business decision.

Another case where trademark ownership was separate from the corporate successor is when Volkswagen won the bidding war for Rolls-Royce Motors and found out that after 5 years they could only build Bentleys, because the Rolls-Royce trademark is owned by Rolls-Royce plc, who licensed it to BMW for automobile use.

It is long established that registering a trademark does not protect it in perpetuity; it must be actively defended. If a company fails to object to infringement of its trademarks, it may lose them. Sometimes in as little as three years, if the trademark passes out of current usage by the owner. I think Ford getting burned by Pep Boys on the use of the Futura name has made them decide to vigorously defend the trademarks they want to keep. They don’t want Mustang to end up like escalator and mimeograph.

Bigfoot Monster trucks has a significant problem with trademark infringement. They have 1 person who that’s their job. You know how many generic monster trucks just happen to look like Bigfoot? Thousands and they go after each one of them legally, its what keeps their logo so significant.