Shelby sues Factory Five Racing

wow, I might just change my mind about how I looked up to Shelby Before. What a bunch of Crap. Greedy old Sum Buck. They have been building these for over 10 years and all of a sudden its a problem, sounds like 100 percent BS to me
 
I haven't looked at the particulars of this case, but in the past, all he has asked in exchange for building Shelby knock-offs was that they donate part of the profits to the Carroll Shelby Children's Foundation ( http://www.cscf.org/ ). IMHO, that's not a lot to ask, considering that they've built their businesses on his name and work.
 
SoonerLS said:
I haven't looked at the particulars of this case, but in the past, all he has asked in exchange for building Shelby knock-offs was that they donate part of the profits to the Carroll Shelby Children's Foundation ( http://www.cscf.org/ ). IMHO, that's not a lot to ask, considering that they've built their businesses on his name and work.
Click to expand...

you need to read all 16 pages. thats not what they want. Not even close to that minimal. Its asinine. Completely 100percent ridiculous
 
rubberducky700 said:
you need to read all 16 pages. thats not what they want. Not even close to that minimal. Its asinine. Completely 100percent ridiculous
Click to expand...
That's what he offers them to avoid litigation. Once it goes to the legal system, that offer's out the window, and there are standards as to what redress is requested.

I have now read it, and, while I'm not a lawyer, it looks far from asinine, and it's certainly not "completely 100percent ridiculous." Under US trademark law, Shelby has a duty to protect his trademarks; if he doesn't, they will be invalidated. His complaint lays out his case, showing (or attempting to show) that the defendants are intentionally using his trademarks (or trademarks he uses under license); it then asks for statutory damages against the defendants. That's all.
 
get on their website. where did they use this stuff. I find the roadster page quite interesting, "not a COBRA, Its a Factory Five." Its said that since I looked at the site over 2 years ago. If thats not asinine, then I want to sue you for quoting what I just said.
 
rubberducky700 said:
get on their website. where did they use this stuff.
Click to expand...
According to the complaint, it was in the META tags. You won't see them unless you look at the page's source code (but search engines will). They'd be complete fools if they still had that in their META tags after the complaint was filed, but I'll bet Shelby's lawyers have copies of the Web pages with those tags intact.
 
You are probably Right, but I dont understand the whole let it go on for 10 years and now its a big deal. and if they have copies then what the hell would if matter if they changed them or not. but still they dont claim shelby in their product one time and I know they havent before now. Its just hard to understand why you would want sue someone who is basicly complimenting your achievements by recreating a product of lesser value, and likeness but then again it confusable with a real cobra. you know aluminum and Fiberglass is reall close, I might get confused too.
 
rubberducky700 said:
You are probably Right, but I dont understand the whole let it go on for 10 years and now its a big deal.
Click to expand...
I doubt they let it go on and just all of a sudden filed the lawsuit. Most likely what happened was Shelby approached Factory Five about this some time ago and tried to reach an agreement, only resorting to legal action after negotiations failed. I know this isn't the first time he has dealt with the makers of Cobra replicas, and I seem to recall hearing something about him dealing with Factory Five a couple of years ago. (Of course, there are so many Cobra knock-offs that I could be mistaken about FF.)

As to why they would remove the META tags, continuing to use Shelby trademarks, etc, after being notified just adds more ammo to Shelby's case--"not only did they use our trademarks, but they willfully continued using them after we notified them that they weren't authorized to use them." In short, it would help Shelby's case by helping to show intent, particularly intent to confuse consumers, diverting them from buying genuine licensed Shelby products.

Personally, I'm not quite convinced about the META tags--I could easily see them being added by an ambitious Web developer trying to drive traffic to his (client's) site; a lot depends on how FF handled it after they were notified that they were using unauthorized trademarks.

Also, I don't know what happened in the negotiations between Shelby and FF; it's entirely possible that he was demanding something FF couldn't offer. That should all come out in the wash, though...
 
I agree with you to an extent about watching your ass with copyrights, but as to the part about a confusable look on the Daytona Coupe. ITS A Replica is it not. only one is alum. and the other is glass with many other diffs to not be an exact cobra. Maybe previous nego. happend but I just cant get over the reasoning. Whats the world comming too if all we can do is sue over who typed what or who said such and such.

"We all steal every day, didnt someone have to make the word up before said it" write that down, or should you?
 
rubberducky700 said:
Its just hard to understand why you would want sue someone who is basicly complimenting your achievements by recreating a product of lesser value, and likeness but then again it confusable with a real cobra. you know aluminum and Fiberglass is reall close, I might get confused too.
Click to expand...
When painted, I doubt that most people could tell the difference between aluminum and fiberglass. Also, the shape of the Daytona Coupe is part of the "trade dress" right that Shelby owns (as asserted in the filing).

Let's look at it this way. Let's say you made sterling silver Rubber Ducky hood ornaments for Lincolns. You spent a lot of time and money developing them, making them capable of withstanding the elements, marketing them, etc, and they become an iconic hood ornament for Lincolns, so you get trademarks and trade dress protection for them. Maybe you even get trademarks on the name Rubber Ducky.

After a few years, things happen, and you stop selling them for awhile, maybe due to reasons beyond your control. Eventually, you start selling them again, or maybe you license your trademarks and trade dress to another manufacturer so they can make them.

Well, while you're not making them, along comes Frogman, and he starts making fiberglass knock-offs for those who want a Rubber Ducky hood ornament. These look "confusingly similar" to your hood ornaments, and Rubber Ducky is even mentioned on his web site (maybe just in the META tags). Then he sells them for half the price of your hood ornaments. Don't you think that would dilute your trademark and diminish the value of your hood ornaments? Maybe he started with good intentions, but he's now competing with you, using your own trademarks and trade dress. Does that sound right to you?
 
sterling silver Rubber Ducky hood ornaments for Lincolns.
Click to expand...

I'm glad I have these patened, Dont want you stealing them. I understand everything your been saying, Ya Who want competition. but then again. his competition is 40 years later and of much lesser quality as is the pricetag. if they were making the same amount of money as his pieces are worth then, there would be something to be upset about.

Painted or not MOST people couldnt tell a difference. those who can could tap on the body and say if its real or not. but if you know what your looking for, a real shelby has much more detail, a kit lacks (just guessing) proably 50 percent or a little less of the detail and worth of a real one. I just think sueing over a (metatag) is petty, I dont fully understand all of the fine print of these tags im sure but any way you smell it, its stinks.
 
You look at a fiberglass body, there are always waves in the paint, not small ones like steel, big ones from end to end... You can block out fiberglas for 1000 hours and it will never look like steel.
 
rubberducky700 said:
I just think sueing over a (metatag) is petty, I dont fully understand all of the fine print of these tags im sure but any way you smell it, its stinks.
Click to expand...
If they were only suing over the META tags, I would tend to agree with you, but they're including it as a part of the fact pattern of the lawsuit--it's just a piece of the puzzle. Taken with the other parts of the complaint, Shelby, et al, allege that this demonstrates a larger pattern of behavior that, per the complaint, has harmed, and, without redress, will continue to harm Shelby.

I think it would also be different if the forum weren't as closely related to/aligned with Factory Five as it is, or if FF had a licensing agreement with Shelby. F'rinstance, if Joey had a Cobra section that had links back to FF, I think Shelby suing him would be patently ( ;) ) absurd, and I don't think they would file a suit like that.
 
Carrol's right.

Carrol as the developer and owner of these trademarks has the right to control their use and licensing.
If any of you guys had to put in the work and effort to establish a recognizable brand name, you'd protect it like a demon too.
All this debate about steel vs glass is off topic.
FFR needs to compensate the man for the use of his products..period.
A lot of us run the Cobrastar emblems. If Lincoln thought that this was damaging the Lincoln trademark, they could do the same as Carrol. Fortunately, Geno's operations enhance Lincolns, so Lincoln probably doesn't mind.
We don't know what Carrol and FFR's past arrangements were, but I'm sure he wouldn't go to the trouble, stress, legal costs, and public battle without good cause- its no fun being in a lawsuit.
 
I use to really like CS...


but all these lawsuits make me wonder about him. its not like these lawsuits make him unpopular...riiight?:shifty:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 186 (members: 0, guests: 186)
Back
Top