Ford craps on it's customers

[Slvr Cpe g35 6mt]

I hate to say this but the ford attys are doing their job. yes i am a lawyer, and I love my G so please dont jump on me for my post. The fact is this has to do with copyright law itself and not the attys. the representations in the calender are in fact rights owned by the ford company (arguably, feel free to challenge it in court). they own the copyright to the two dimentional drawings that helped create the three dimentional car itself. they are using this to restrict any other two dimentional representations that would violate their copyright.Do I think this is right? NO! but are the attys doing their job, yes. Is ford a bunch of losers, yes. happy birthday, and happy nissan! peace

[OriginalWheelman]

While I see your point, what about the fact that images are the property of the photographer. My wife is a model, and once she accepts payment from a photographer to take her picture, the pictures are the property and copyright of the photographer. How is this situation different? She has no rights to her own image at that point, yet Ford can lay claim to 12 of the hundreds of thousands of Mustangs they made?

[hsckris]

To all who say ford=fail and all that crap....

From what I can tell, you've owned bad Fords. EVERY company has some dud cars over the years, the 92 taurus for example was no rock star. But Ford also has some good cars. I've already had my 2006 Nissan in more than my 2003 Ford, which has 3 times the mileage.

You can't base your opinions on cars' reliability and longevity from experience with a particular model. You have to base them on the aggregate of all the cars of that model manufactured by that company, the quality control/initial quality, etc. From that standpoint, Ford does pretty well... and sometimes I even wonder if I should've bought an F150 instead of a Frontier (I like my truck, but after I bought it I found out I could've had an f150 for the same $ and a full size truck is obviously more capable).

[Bubba1]

To all who say ford=fail and all that crap....

From what I can tell, you've owned bad Fords. EVERY company has some dud cars over the years, the 92 taurus for example was no rock star. But Ford also has some good cars. I've already had my 2006 Nissan in more than my 2003 Ford, which has 3 times the mileage.

You can't base your opinions on cars' reliability and longevity from experience with a particular model. You have to base them on the aggregate of all the cars of that model manufactured by that company, the quality control/initial quality, etc. From that standpoint, Ford does pretty well... and sometimes I even wonder if I should've bought an F150 instead of a Frontier (I like my truck, but after I bought it I found out I could've had an f150 for the same $ and a full size truck is obviously more capable).

HSChris, of course many people's opinions are influenced by their personal experiences, including me. I've owned good and bad Fords. I turned to Japanese cars in the 80's because Ford built crappy cars and were downright arrogant when it came to warranty claims, and those warranty problems and recalls were far more numerous than the Japanese makes. I didn't realize how much crap I had put up with those Fords until my first toyota went 200K miles without a single problem. In fact all the japanese cars I've owned combined together have had fewer warranty problems than any single Ford I've ever leased. That's appalling.

Being the patriotic type, I had continued to keep one Ford in the ol' Bubba fleet for many years until I finally got tired of fighting Ford on every warranty claim. Had Ford acted more professionally I probably wouldn't have been as upset about bringing the last car back to the dealer a dozen times in 36 months for warranty problems and recalls. These werent nit picky items, we're talking some serious stuff.

I agree, Ford is building better cars now, but so is every else. But this thread is an example that the arrogance that got Ford in trouble with us Baby Boomers in the 70's, 80's and early 90's is very much alive and well today. Perhaps some day Ford will build a car that I'll want to buy, but given my negative personal experiences with them, it doesn't seem to be that likely.

[Asmar]

Ford SUCKS!

[Woot!]

I hate to say this but the ford attys are doing their job. yes i am a lawyer, and I love my G so please dont jump on me for my post. The fact is this has to do with copyright law itself and not the attys. the representations in the calender are in fact rights owned by the ford company (arguably, feel free to challenge it in court). they own the copyright to the two dimentional drawings that helped create the three dimentional car itself. they are using this to restrict any other two dimentional representations that would violate their copyright.Do I think this is right? NO! but are the attys doing their job, yes. Is ford a bunch of losers, yes. happy birthday, and happy nissan! peace

I think you are wrong. There are so dam many calenders out there that are F*rd Mustang calenders. The photograph belongs to the photographer and unless it is an exact copy than I don't think they can do sh** about it as far as copyright.

F*rd are just being a bunch of a$$. Who the hell would turn down free advertising???

[xckid]

since they apperetnly still own your ford cars and your ford pictures what about the ppl on ebay ? trying to sell their ford WTf seriously

[Jesda]

I agree, Ford is building better cars now, but so is every else. But this thread is an example that the arrogance that got Ford in trouble with us Baby Boomers in the 70's, 80's and early 90's is very much alive and well today.

Indeed. GM is learning how to do business in a world where Ford and GM no longer own the auto industry, and Ford has some lingering arrogance and stupidity leftover from the 70s and 80s. The "do or die" acknowledgment of the real world has yet to sink in. Unfortunately, some of this attitude is creeping in at Nissan.

Ford's only hope now is waiting for guys like Bubba to kick the bucket. If you see this guy near you, and armed, watch out:

[lofapoo]

Same thing happened with a guy selling shirts that slightly resembled a VW Rabbit, although it had no markings on it whatsoever.

This is Ford though, so I really couldn't care less. They haven't had my attention since the fox-body died, so they can alienate their customers in which ever way they please, it doesn't bother me

[Bubba1]

Indeed. GM is learning how to do business in a world where Ford and GM no longer own the auto industry, and Ford has some lingering arrogance and stupidity leftover from the 70s and 80s. The "do or die" acknowledgment of the real world has yet to sink in. Unfortunately, some of this attitude is creeping in at Nissan.

Ford's only hope now is waiting for guys like Bubba to kick the bucket. If you see this guy near you, and armed, watch out:

[DeXteR]

anyone tried the link lately? I get a database error. I think the internet just pwned BMC... sorry guys, just trying to help.

[NY94J30]

I hate to say this but the ford attys are doing their job. yes i am a lawyer, and I love my G so please dont jump on me for my post. The fact is this has to do with copyright law itself and not the attys. the representations in the calender are in fact rights owned by the ford company (arguably, feel free to challenge it in court). they own the copyright to the two dimentional drawings that helped create the three dimentional car itself. they are using this to restrict any other two dimentional representations that would violate their copyright.Do I think this is right? NO! but are the attys doing their job, yes. Is ford a bunch of losers, yes. happy birthday, and happy nissan! peace

That's the most ridiculous justification/rationalization I have read in a while. It is the law, not the lawyers, who are just doing their job? Are you suggesting that copyright law eliminates both discretion and common sense? General counsel clearly had a choice, and they made an inane one. Moreover, I cannot imagine that there is not a fair use issue at play here. Will they show up at car shows next with an injunction.

[Woot!]

anyone tried the link lately? I get a database error. I think the internet just pwned BMC... sorry guys, just trying to help.

Maybe F*rd decided that they own the BMC because it has the word M*stang in it

[sasage900]

they are losin there *** anyway and they mustang is the only thing keeping them afloat

[dickie]

i laugh at a lot of the anti-ford sentiment in this thread. every manufacturer has had its share of ups and downs over the years, and since Ford has been around longer its no surprise they have created a lot of fans and at least as many rabid **** talkers.

the simple fact is, Ford (along with GM) has been creating vehicles with fewer flaws from production and greater value than many competitors (including, as Jesda mentioned, Nissan) in the past few years. The choices made by their legal department don't necessarily reflect on the quality of the vehicles they create.

YES, the design of the Mustang is copyrighted... and its their decision whether to pursue legal action against infringement cases. Personally, I believe attacking their consumer-base is an admittedly stupid move, but i doubt their upper-level management had anything to do with it and will be pretty pissed when they see what the legal department dragged home and threw on their doorstep.

Comments like, "Ford sucks because their cars break down!" really doesn't fit here, regardless of how much of an ignorantly broad generalization it may be.

For the record, my family has owned Ford products almost exclusively (mostly trucks) and we have never had a single problem aside from regular maintenance issues. My dad's truck lasted 250,000 miles through 6 rural Michigan winters without fail. His current truck is at 180,000 on the original clutch and he changes the oil when he feels like it. My grandad's truck outlived him, and he abused it on a daily basis.

I owned one Ford truck myself, a 1984 SWB 4x4 that had a lot of blow-by, and I was able to handle terrain in it that my friends' 2002 Chevy and Nissan hardbody couldn't.

[adrianfromthecastle]

damn that sucks...

LOL... (literally, by FORD)

[Kalok]

YES, the design of the Mustang is copyrighted... and its their decision whether to pursue legal action against infringement cases. Personally, I believe attacking their consumer-base is an admittedly stupid move, but i doubt their upper-level management had anything to do with it and will be pretty pissed when they see what the legal department dragged home and threw on their doorstep.

Actually, you're incorrect. Mustang is TRADEMARKED, not COPYRIGHTED.

With this being said, even if it were copyrighted, "fair usage" laws would apply. In addition, since virtually all of these cars are modified both mechanically and visually, they would also be far enough from the manufacturers original copyright, if there was one, to be unique works. Which is why, in addition to aforementioned "fair usage" laws, LEGALLY Weird Al can get away with writing parodies of copyrighted songs. He asks permission, but he doesn't HAVE to.

Now, onto trademarks. Exercising their trademark is only applicable if the BMC car club is making something that is directly competing against FMC (Ford Motor Company) that could cause brand confusion. Nobody would mistake a calendar put out on the market by a car club as being created by Ford, and thus creating brand conffusion. An example of what I am talking about is how Nissan motor cars and Nissan noodles can have the same trademarked name.

With that being said, not only does FMC have no legal leg to stand on, they're being a$$. Just like Nissan when they went after Nissan computers.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled mayhem.

[dickie]

thanks for correcting me, i must have slipped that in without meaning to. im well aware of the differences and what they entail in legal situations...

and i have been led to believe that in this case since the forums are seeking profit using pictures of the TRADEMARKED design, at least in the eyes of the corporate lawyers, they are in an actionable position.

the point i was making had more to do with the association of the poor decision of some lawyers or consultants within the company to the cars and trucks rolling off the lines.

[Kalok]

thanks for correcting me, i must have slipped that in without meaning to. im well aware of the differences and what they entail in legal situations...

and i have been led to believe that in this case since the forums are seeking profit using pictures of the TRADEMARKED design, at least in the eyes of the corporate lawyers, they are in an actionable position.-

Trademark applies to "brand confusion" and what a customer might reasonably think, as identified by the Nissan Motors/Nissan Noodles comparison. Nobody would ever think that the BMC calendar was a Black Mustang Club calendar released by FMC, unless they were a complete moron.

The pictures themselves are the legal copyrighted property of the photographer (unless waivers were signed), and the calendar is copyrighted by the forum.

When you attempt to sell your car in the Auto Trader, a car forum, Craig's List, or eBay, you typically put a picture of it in there, you own the copyright to that picture. You are selling your car "for profit". If Ford had a legal leg to stand on, they'd be going after all of these "online dealership" guys that make money buying and selling cars online.

Look at all of the enthusiast sites that make a profit off of banner advertisements or membership fees that have pictures of member's cars on them. Going by the "trademark enforcement" theory, they could sue any enthusiast forum that turned a profit and had its member's cars pictured on it.

[NY94J30]

The trademark issue - or potential issue - here, I imagine revolves around the use of the Ford emblem, i.e., trademark, in a manner which might imply Ford's endorsement. Not, as some have stated, the representation of a Mustang itself. I think that any car, debadged, or any piece of clothing without prominent label or logo, may be used as a matter of fair use. Take that with a grain of salt, however, as it's based on anecdotal evidence.

[dickie]

thats why commercials for car-care related products typically "alter" the vehicles including de-badging?

[Kalok]

thats why commercials for car-care related products typically "alter" the vehicles including de-badging?

Actually they do that for a couple of reasons. One is "product placement". Why would they add "Ford" to their TV commercial when Ford isn't paying them any money to do so? It's the same reason why, in movies, some items you see their brand names and some you don't. Product placement is big business.

The other reason is "endorsement". Again, endorsement is big money. When you endorse a product, I'm not talking from an advertising standpoint (see above), you say that a product meets a specific need (or a set of specific needs). If that product falls short, you may be found liable of false or misleading advertisement.

It has nothing to do with legal ramifications at all. If it did they'd have to completely change the shape and style of the vehicle.

[Kalok]

The trademark issue - or potential issue - here, I imagine revolves around the use of the Ford emblem, i.e., trademark, in a manner which might imply Ford's endorsement. Not, as some have stated, the representation of a Mustang itself. I think that any car, debadged, or any piece of clothing without prominent label or logo, may be used as a matter of fair use. Take that with a grain of salt, however, as it's based on anecdotal evidence.

You're taking that out of context. You're talking copyright versus trademark.

The trademark law is VERY specific about what constitutes trademark infringement. Ford and Mustang are TRADEMARKS of Ford Motor Company. As such, nobody can use them to make a competing product or a product that might cause brand confusion in that people think that the product was manufactured by Ford Motor Company or is endorsed by Ford Motor Company.

COPYRIGHT, which is what is applicable to this calendar, has no such stipulation. These images on the calendar are legal under "fair usage" laws. See my aforementioned references to music.

If this were not the case, every company out there could, and would (in today's 'sue em, don't make better products' society) sue for every occurrence they find someone making money off of their trademarks that isn't licensed. This would kill the car enthusiast industry. This would also kill Auto Trader, Craig's List, eBay, you name it. Any site where people buy, sell, or trade cars.

[S3t0_S13]

wow this is truely epic

[Jesda]

Anyone remember a game called Epic Pinball from Epic Megagames?

[Kalok]

Anyone remember a game called Epic Pinball from Epic Megagames?

I loved that game.

[cmfireman]

Apparently the issue has been resolved:

Taken from another forum:

Quote »My name is Whitney Drake and I work in Ford Communications.We've been watching this discussion with interest and I'd like toclarify what is essentially a misunderstanding.

Yesterday we spoke to both Cafe Press and the Black Mustang Cluband explained the situation (about the Black Mustang Club’s calendar) to everyone's satisfaction. Ford has no problem with Mustang or other car owners taking pictures of their vehicles for use in club materials like calendars. What we do have an issue with are individuals using Ford’s logo and other trademarks for products they intend to sell. Understandably, we have to take the protection of our brands and licensing very seriously.

Ford did not send the Black Mustang Club a “cease and desist” letter telling them that they could not use images of their own cars in their calendar. The decision not to allow the calendars to be printed was made by Cafe Press, because we had gotten in touch with them in the past about trademark infringements on products they sold.

The Black Mustang Club, and any other Ford enthusiast club, are free to take pictures of their own vehicles for use in calendars or other materials as long as they don't use Ford trademarks in products that will be sold.

I think it is great that the Black Mustang Club, and any other enthusiast club, would take pictures of their own vehicles for use in calendars or other materials.

I'm looking forward to purchasing a copy to hang in the garage nextto my Mustang (even if mine isn't black).

Thanks for giving us the chance to have our say.[/quote]

[PapaSmurf2k3]

OK,I was waiting for something like that. Seriously... this is exactly how I pictured this playing out.

[Woot!]

What a bunch of p******.

What they meant to say:

"We are now about to **** our pants because this blew up into something bigger than we thought it would. In order to keep paying our employees than we are going to temporarily let up on our reputation of being a**holes to our customers."

F*rd is a poor excuse for a business.

[themadscientist]

What they meant to say:

"We are now about to **** our pants because this blew up into something bigger than we thought it would. In order to keep paying our employees than we are going to temporarily let up on our reputation of being a**holes to our customers."

You read it that way too?