FoMoCo suing companies using "Mustang" in their names???

Big_B · Jul 4, 2006

So I got the latest newsletter/magazine thing from Mustangs Plus on Saturday and there is an article about how Ford has sicked the lawyers on them and is making them change their name "or else". Has anyone else heard about this? I having been trying to find info on the web, but haven't found any yet.

These companies that sue their customers really tick me off. This company has been around for 25 years, and is family owned and operated.

(Sort of off-topic for tech, but I figured there was more traffic here)

Cannoball888 · Jul 4, 2006

Old but sad news.
http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?t=635959

Big_B · Jul 5, 2006

Yeah I see that now, thanks Cannoball888. It was the first I had heard of it, and it really pissed me off. Another nail in the coffin of me buying another Ford ever again.

Hack · Jul 5, 2006

I used to like Mustang's Plus - even though their prices are too high and they overcharge for shipping... They do have a better variety of items than many other places. If I couldn't find something anywhere else I would buy from them.

Now they are bugging me. I'll probably always own a Ford, but I'm unlikely to buy from Mustang's Plus again. I think that Ford wouldn't do this if they didn't believe they have to. Mustang's Plus wouldn't exist if it weren't for Ford, and now they are constantly bad mouthing Ford in all their literature.

rsev216 · Jul 5, 2006

Don't blame Mustangs Plus. They are just trying to survive.
Get the whole story...http://fightford.org/

68keyblr · Jul 6, 2006

Hack said:
Mustang's Plus wouldn't exist if it weren't for Ford, and now they are constantly bad mouthing Ford in all their literature.

The converse of that statement is also very likely true. Without MustangsPlus, Mustang Depot, etc etc there probably wouldn't be a Mustang anymore! It's the classic enthusiasts that kept the Mustang alive when it was slated for cancellation, and it was the Mustang suppliers that kept the enthusiasts going.

I seriously doubt that all of Ford management is on board with this - sounds like a law firm in Utah trying justify their existence, and the Ford legal dept is all to willing to go along with it. I can't imagine anyone in Ford's marketing department (or anyone who has taken marketing 101 at the local community college) could possibly think this is a good idea for Ford.

rbohm · Jul 6, 2006

ford has already lost two trademarks because they did not protect them, those being GT-40 and futura. if ford does not aggressively protect their remaining trademarks, they could lose those also. if ford loses the mustang trademark, they could be enjoined from selling cars with the mustang name, and that name could then be sold to another company to build mustangs, a company like say KIA.

but lets put this into a personal context. say you built a business with a particular trademark. let us also say that you licensed the trademark out to a couple of companies to use with in a certain context. what would you do if you were in danger of losing that trademark because you didnt protect it? likely the exact same thing that ford, gm, harley davidson, and many others are doing right now, and have done in the past. you would fight to hold onto that trademark anyway you could. if that meant canceling agreements, then so be it. remember if you lose that trademark, someone else could pick it up, and prevent you from using it, even though YOU built a business around it, and ran that business for 20+ years. YOU would then have to bear the expense of changing the trademark YOU created, all because YOU didnt protect it.

now then, you think ford should just let the mustang trademark go? not protect it? let some cheap car company like KIA build front drive mustangs?

limey66 · Jul 6, 2006

I for one, fully agree with what rbohm is saying, but how can any company that supports the Mustang not use 'Mustang' in it's name? How else are they to describe what they do?

These companies are not trying to mislead anyone, or to try and sell whole cars and call them Mustangs - that would be wrong and should rightly be stopped if it were to happen. Look at all the Cobra and GT40 replicas there are about, all under different names.

None of these companies are competing in the same market area as Ford, and have been indirectly supporting FoMoCo for the last 40 years.

Ford need to licence each company to allow them to use the name, for a nominal fee, and to grow up.

BobV · Jul 6, 2006

limey66 said:
I for one, fully agree with what rbohm is saying, but how can any company that supports the Mustang not use 'Mustang' in it's name? How else are they to describe what they do?

...National Parts Depot...
...The Paddock...
...Year One...

NasaGT · Jul 6, 2006

For me the biggest issue is that alot of these companies got permission from Ford 20+ years ago to use 'Mustang' in their name, and now Ford wants them to change it. To an established company, your name is everything. Changing it is almost like starting over.

rsev216 · Jul 6, 2006

A company licensing the use of it's trademarks is protecting the trademark. You only risk losing a trademark if you allow usage without permission. All Ford needs to do is to issue a $1 license to the aftermarket suppliers, magazines, clubs, etc along with rules on how the trademark can be used. It is not necessary to put them out of business to retain control.

68keyblr · Jul 6, 2006

I think everyone agrees that Ford needs to protect their trademarks, that is not in dispute.

The problem is the way Ford is going about it. If they did license the use of the word "Mustang" to the suppliers 25 years ago there would be no problem today. Ford simply gave them the thumbs up and a nod and a wink.

Now, instead of solving the problem in a sensible way the doesn't bite the hand that has fed them all these years they are in essence trying to damage or ruin these companies.

Is Ford management so inept that they didn't realize that not licensing the Mustang name might be a problem for 25 years now??? That's got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Don't you think that Ford could simply have all of these Mustang suppliers sign a legal document acknowledging that "Mustang" is a trademark of Ford and is being used only with Ford's consent? I'd bet all of these suppliers would be willing to do that. I'm no lawyer but I'm sure there's a way to establish the legal precedent without ruining our hobby.

Read up on the real story and how it will affect you and I at www.fightford.org

degins · Jul 6, 2006

limey66 said:
...Ford need to licence each company to allow them to use the name, for a nominal fee, and to grow up.

Exactly right! Letting an outside law firm loose on loyal followers is unwise. They could easily issue licences that are limited to the use of the "Mustang" name for inclusion in a business name.

CochinoFilipino · Jul 6, 2006

Big_B said:
(Sort of off-topic for tech, but I figured there was more traffic here)

You're right. It belongs in Talk. And if you go there you'll see this topic as a Sticky over there.

Hack · Jul 6, 2006

68keyblr said:
I think everyone agrees that Ford needs to protect their trademarks, that is not in dispute.

The problem is the way Ford is going about it. If they did license the use of the word "Mustang" to the suppliers 25 years ago there would be no problem today. Ford simply gave them the thumbs up and a nod and a wink.

Now, instead of solving the problem in a sensible way the doesn't bite the hand that has fed them all these years they are in essence trying to damage or ruin these companies.

Is Ford management so inept that they didn't realize that not licensing the Mustang name might be a problem for 25 years now??? That's got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Don't you think that Ford could simply have all of these Mustang suppliers sign a legal document acknowledging that "Mustang" is a trademark of Ford and is being used only with Ford's consent? I'd bet all of these suppliers would be willing to do that. I'm no lawyer but I'm sure there's a way to establish the legal precedent without ruining our hobby.

Read up on the real story and how it will affect you and I at www.fightford.org

Ego is always interesting to me. Lets all assume that we know more than the high buck managers at Ford who are making these decisions.

"Everyone other than me is an idiot and has no idea what they are doing." That's what I feel like I'm hearing. I think that Ford has every right and should get some money from people who are making tons of money using their name. I want Ford to stay in business and if they need to exploit this revenue stream so that they can continue building new Mustangs - I'm totally on board with them.

I've heard a lot recently about how Ford and GM, well GM especially, are having financial trouble. Last year GM set sales records and also lost record $$. That can't be good!

Anyway I think I'm making my point.

68keyblr · Jul 6, 2006

Hack said:
Ego is always interesting to me. Lets all assume that we know more than the high buck managers at Ford who are making these decisions.

Sorry, I don't see where ego enters in at all.

You can't dispute the fact that Ford is pursuing this after 25 years of doing nothing...which begs the question as to why did it take them 25 years to figure out they'd better license the Mustang name. Would that not be considered "stupid"? I don't care how much money their execs make.

It's not simply me saying it's a stupid policy that is hurting Ford - just take a look around at the message boards, editorials in the Mustang Mags, etc etc etc. There's a whole lot of people that see it the same way. We can even point to the proverbial Rocket Scientist (Reenmachine) who also sees the folly of Ford's actions.

Salary has very little to do with intelligence - ever hear of the "Peter Principle"? Enron? The Edsil? Motorola? High dollar executives are certainly fallible and have been known to make idiotic decisions from time to time. Anyone on this forum that works for a big company can attest to that. Dilbert is a very popular cartoon for a very good reason.

The point is, Ford can easily accomplish their goal of protecting the Mustang name without alienating their most loyal customers...but they've chosen to go about it in a hostile manner. And that is the problem.

danny clemens · Jul 6, 2006

Hack said:
Ego is always interesting to me. Lets all assume that we know more than the high buck managers at Ford who are making these decisions.

If these high dollar execs are so smart then why is Ford in financial trouble? I'm not a genius but my finances are very much in order. Ford is in trouble and I guess they're lashing out at everybody. These businesses and the people that buy from them have kept interest in the Mustang in the public's eye. Ford should be grateful for the people that support the Mustang and show them that they are appreciated. Instead they're trying to put people out of business that supply us with parts.

I'm not a lawyer but it doesn't seem like somebody else could steal their name as long as they are actively using it. Can they?

Big_B · Jul 6, 2006

CochinoFilipino said:
You're right. It belongs in Talk. And if you go there you'll see this topic as a Sticky over there.

Let's leave this conversation to the thread already in progress in Talk guys.
(Sorry about that)

electricgreen · Jul 6, 2006

Hack said:
Ego is always interesting to me. Lets all assume that we know more than the high buck managers at Ford who are making these decisions.

"Everyone other than me is an idiot and has no idea what they are doing." That's what I feel like I'm hearing. I think that Ford has every right and should get some money from people who are making tons of money using their name. I want Ford to stay in business and if they need to exploit this revenue stream so that they can continue building new Mustangs - I'm totally on board with them.

I've heard a lot recently about how Ford and GM, well GM especially, are having financial trouble. Last year GM set sales records and also lost record $$. That can't be good!

Anyway I think I'm making my point.

Sounds like you work for the law firm serving the suppliers. You are on a forum full of folks that depend on those suppliers for parts for their cars. And quite probably were part of the rescue of the Mustang when ford wanted to axe it for the probe. I don't you'll find much support for your opinion here. If they need to do this to save the Mustang, let 07 be the last year, because this is dirty pool. It's a giant black eye on us as enthusiests and makes me ashamed to own fords.

grego37 · Jul 6, 2006

Its not just the word Mustang.

Any company with
with the word Mustang, Ford, Thunderbird, Fairlane, Pinto, cougar, Shelby, etc...etc... in their business name, will be told to change their name, otherwise be sued.

FoMoCo suing companies using "Mustang" in their names???

Big_B

New Member

Cannoball888

New Member

Big_B

New Member

Hack

rsev216

Member

68keyblr

rbohm

limey66

Member

BobV

NasaGT

rsev216

Member

68keyblr

degins

Member

CochinoFilipino

Hack

68keyblr

danny clemens

Member

Big_B

New Member

electricgreen

grego37

New Member

Similar threads

FoMoCo suing companies using "Mustang" in their names???

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency