NOTICE to anyone that's been hassled by GM about using their logos

[Rusty Steele]

First, I just want to point out that I'm "another" board user, I'm using this name because I want to remain annonymous for the moment (mod's can figure out who I am, but that's okay!)

Below is a link to a government website about patent, copyright and trademark law:

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/tmlaw2.html#_Toc25751127

I just spent half the afternoon reading thru the trademark section, and came across something that will be of interest to anyone that GM has told to quit using their logos. Click on the link above, and WAY DOWN in the table of contents (28 pages down on my computer) you'll find "TITLE X CONSTRUCTIONS AND DEFINTIONS, §45 (15 U.S.C. §1127). Click on that and scroll down a bit, and you'll find the following:

Abandonment of mark.
A mark shall be deemed to be “abandoned” if either of the following occurs:
(1) When its use has been discontinued with intent not to resume such use. Intent not to resume may be inferred from circumstances. Nonuse for 3 consecutive years shall be prima facie evidence of abandonment. “Use” of a mark means the bona fide use of such mark made in the ordinary course of trade, and not made merely to reserve a right in a mark.

Based on this statement, it's clear in MY mind that GM has in fact, ABANDONED the Grand National, T-Type, GNX and "Power-6" trademarks! The popular "Buick Motorsports" logo was never theirs to begin with, and even if it was, I don't believe Buick has used it in several years anyway.

The statement above is perfectly clear in MY eyes. A trademark must be ACTIVELY used in the course of trade within a 3 year period, a company can't just "sit" on it because they've used it in the past. Can someone tell me the last year any of the above trademarks were used by GM? I'm betting it was WELL before Y2K.

Next time anyone selling GN t-shirts or hats at an event gets approached by the "GM police", hand them a printout of the law, then tell them to leave you alone and go design a decent car.

Responses are encourged, thank you.

 

[NICKG]

actually this is not true

the simple fact is that they make replacement emblems still ...and they say grand national. and have the power six. if you have deep pockets 9and gm does) the legal fees of them sueing you can and will definetly put anyone, buisness or whatever in a hurt! porsche did this a few years ago, and by making replacement parts for these cars(ie emblems) the names were protected.

 

[GN One Day...]

Did they stop making parts, emblems, seat covers, GNX plaques etc? If those are made, they could say they're still making money off of them from parts business. Or even putting a turbo 6 on a concept car to stir interest. Just playing devil's advocate, I think they should give you permission to use them anyway. Keeps interest in the product while they sit back and won't do it on their own.

 

[GN One Day...]

Oops, Nick beat me to it.

 

[Rusty Steele]

good points. I do know they don't make GNX emblems, and that "GNX" was never trademarked anyway.

others?

 

[NICKG]

you onestly think that the did not trademark "gnx"?nj

you have to be dum to think that! why do you think that kirban had to raise the prices on the emblems he sold? gm found out that he was sellin them (and buying them from their manufacturer) thes companies have all those types of things trademarked before you or i even hear of the names! ever heard of a patent lawyer? trade lawyer? gm probably has hundreds on their payroll. i say you go ahead and push your luck, cause they will roll all over you cause it aint gonna cost them to sue you, but it will cost you to defend yourself. and for what? alot of these companies will liscense these thing to people for a % of the income they generate. the reason i know this is first hand. i know people who havew been sued over the use or likeness on a buisness card! or a store window! for floor mats! mugs, even stickers!

 

[Rusty Steele]

I'd have to be dumb? Call Dennis and ask him yourself.

If the fact that GM still sells emblems absolves them from trademark abandonment, then so be it. I have other buttons I can push.

Here's the rules of infringement:

TITLE VI — REMEDIES
§32 (15 U.S.C. §1114). Remedies; infringement; innocent infringers
(1) Any person who shall, without the consent of the registrant—

(a) use in commerce any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a registered mark in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of any goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; or

(b) reproduce, counterfeit, copy or colorably imitate a registered mark and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisements intended to be used in commerce upon or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive,

shall be liable in a civil action by the registrant for the remedies hereinafter provided. Under subsection (b) hereof, the registrant shall not be entitled to recover profits or damages unless the acts have been committed with knowledge that such imitation is intended to be used to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.

Notice all the parts I've highlighted. Notice that to constitute infringement, it must be proven the person using the trademark intended to confuse or deceive or otherwise cause his customers to mistakenly believing they're purchasing a product made by the trademark holder.

Therefore, if a guy is selling "GN" T-shirts or "Power-6" ballcaps at an event, AND he has a big sign explaining that they ARE NOT GM MANUFACTURED OR ENDORSED ITEMS, is he guilty of infringement, according to the wording of the law? Keep in mind here that GM licensed their logos for use on vehicles and their parts, not for T-shirts or ballcaps. Also, the guy selling these items is in no way demeaning or otherwise causing damage to the trademark holder in any way. Another interesting note: trademark law allows competitors to use someone elses trademark in their advertising:

[ (4) The following shall not be actionable under this section:

(A) Fair use of a famous mark by another person in comparative commercial advertising or promotion to identify the competing goods or services of the owner of the famous mark. ]

In other words, it's perfectly fine for Ford to use GM logos in their commercials to try and prove GM makes an inferior vehicle.

Yet, GM takes issue with a few people making some spare change selling t-shirts and hats that actually PROMOTE their products?

This is my whole point here. WHY does GM even care? I can't believe that a company that spends millions of dollars a year on advertising feels they need to stop a handful of people, that are promoting GM, from making a few hundred dollars a year.

All I'm doing here is trying to figure out if they actually have legal grounds TO stop them.

 

[salvageV6]

Interesting.

I wonder if the first person to have balls big enough to take on GM over this stuff would get support from the boards?

We could take up a big collection and start promoting this on other GM sites.

Might make them take a more "defensive" posture other than alienating their prospective customers.

I bet a lot of internet support and bad publicity just might make them back down a bit.

A free lawyer from a car enthusiast site might help a bit too.

The Ford guys might get a kick out of it but I think they would be still preoccupied in their own suits to notice much.

Would be interesting to see a case actually make it to court with the publicity and all.

PS: Where's the real Rusty been lately?

 

[NICKG]

trust me, it won't be gm police

it will be the FBI, they will raid your place and take all your product. then YOU will have to try to prove you stuff is legal.in the mean time you have all that $ tied up in confiscated productthat you cannt sell. I CAN TELL YOU THIS FIRST HAND! BEEN THERE DONE THAT, LOST JOB BECAUSE OF IT! it is legal to sell parts that fit cars, but it is definetly trademark infringement to print T-shirts with these names on it. what you do not understand is that it is not the act of say this fits this or that, it is selling items with the name. if you feel you know better(you obviously do) go ahead and get sued over it, but you were warned! you may get away for a while but if they decide to crack down on this type of buisness, you have no legs to stand on. i suggest you put your first $10,000 you earn in a savings account for the lawyers you will need to hire. furthermore You should read your posted laws, if you sell me a t shirt and it says "buick grand national" i asume you had legal rights to make it, you ever see what happens to people who sell fake nikes? or fake sports rteam apparel?... you guessed it, they get sued and or get arrested, you see it on the news here(new york) all the time. i can care less if they screw you, but i have seen what happens in these cases. even if you do try to fight, you better have a free lawyer or really (millions possibly) deep pockets. Seriously, you should cunsult a good copyrights/civil/patent lawyer. if you don't, it is your ass in the target sights

 

[kenmosher]

The GN/TType web site actually had a brush with GM over the use of the logos (specifically the GN, T-Type and Power 6) back when we started.

We were pretty innocent, but we found a reasonable (hard to believe, but they do exist! ) person at GM and got a letter stating that we have permission to use the logos on the site since we are an enthusiasts group and not trying to make a profit off of them.

It was kind of scary at first!

 

[Rusty Steele]

Nick, did it ever occur to you that I'm on YOUR side? Trademark, patent and copyright law is intended to protect people and or companies from others profiting at their expense, and from ill-will or "damage" caused by someone selling inferior counterfeit products. What I'm actually taking the time to investigate here is exactly what does, and more importantly, DOES NOT constitute infringement.

You mentioned fake Nikes and sports apparel. That indeed is trademark infringement. Now, if someone starts selling fake buicks, they're going to have a problem. You say printing t-shirts with "their names" on it is trademark infringement. Suppose I take a photo of MY grand national, and a closeup photo of the grand national emblem that's on my vehicle, and put both photos on a t-shirt. Now suppose I show up at a buick event with that t-shirt, and 20 people want one just like it. I say okay, print them up and sell them. Does GM have the right to tell me I can't sell pictures of my own car? It's not "their" car anymore. And if I specifically tell you my shirts weren't GM products, then there's no assumption they were endorsed.

Another point: turbobuick.com is a business, and there are pictures of buick vehicles and their logos on the board. As noted in Ken's post, GM apparently doesn't want anyone "to make a profit off of them." But without GM and these buicks, it's safe to assume turbobuick.com wouldn't exist. Therefore, it's logical to assume that turbobuick.com is "making money off of GM". Infringement? I don't believe so, because what little pittance IS made is not at the expense of GM. And frankly, I don't believe the pittance made selling hats is at the expense of GM either. (And no offense to the board, I'm just trying to make a point)

I honestly don't know why GM doesn't EMBRACE the "enthusiasts" who take the time and effort PROMOTING its products, even if it means letting said enthusiast make a couple of bucks by adding their weird little "6" to a hat.

 

[b4black]

Originally posted by Rusty Steele
Another point: turbobuick.com is a business,

Business? Since when did TB.com become a business?

 

[jon_we4]

A vendor I work with is having big problems with GM ...

and its really stupid because they dont make enough money on the few products that "violate" to really pay the license fee.

They are jerks for ignoring the community like they never built the cars.....then they try to kill off the vendors.

Try to talk to GM or Buick about the cars and they acctually say to go to www.turbobuick.com (they did tell me that)!



They even claimed trademarking designs that were not Buick originated.

Jon

 

[Rusty Steele]

as I stated, I mean no offense to the board. But strictly speaking, the board is a business because they collect money from advertisers. Making a PROFIT is another story altogether!

 

[Jim@GMHTP]

Originally posted by Rusty Steele
You mentioned fake Nikes and sports apparel. That indeed is trademark infringement. Now, if someone starts selling fake buicks, they're going to have a problem. You say printing t-shirts with "their names" on it is trademark infringement. Suppose I take a photo of MY grand national, and a closeup photo of the grand national emblem that's on my vehicle, and put both photos on a t-shirt. Now suppose I show up at a buick event with that t-shirt, and 20 people want one just like it. I say okay, print them up and sell them. Does GM have the right to tell me I can't sell pictures of my own car? It's not "their" car anymore. And if I specifically tell you my shirts weren't GM products, then there's no assumption they were endorsed.

Rusty, I've dealt with GM on this specific issue in regards to licensing and they do in fact own the rights to the GN body style, regadless of who owns the actual car. I produced an officially licensed GM product and have two binders and a stack of other documents that deal exclusively with licensing issues and requirements. I even have the requirements for textiles and apparel, even though my product had nothing to do with clothes. I was pretty ignorant to the whole process going in, but now that I'm involved with it, I feel the lengths they go to protect their trademarks is warranted. They have invested billions of dollars in their brand names, products and logos and have a legal right to protect that investment.

Although licensees do have forms they can submit to EMI regarding companies they believe are selling unlicensed products, turning someone in can be as easy as dialing 1-888-TMFRAUD.

 

[pat83t]

This just in: G* will now be sueing anyone who says the words G*, Ch*vy, B**ck, *ldsm*bile, C*dillac, or any approximaty there of, even in written, verbal or telepathic conversations.


What the hell do they care? If it is positive, right it off as free advertising, if it is negative, then go after them.

 

[whitehot84]

I'm with Rusty here. When was the last time GM sold anything with the above named logos on it. Of course they have deep pockets but they still have to prove you have damaged them in some way. I just don't see it. They would spend more on a law suit than they could ever claim to lose in business.
They should concentrate on building a car that someone would want to be seen in public in.

 

[Jim@GMHTP]

GM has had a constant flow of officially-licensed products with those names and logos on them since the cars were first introduced, albeit not the same volume of some of their more popular brand names like Corvette. To assume they are public domain is not a good idea without first seeking reliable legal counsel on the matter.

The precedent has already been set by unscrupulous individuals looking to make a quick buck by selling poor quality items. The lawyers and appropriate agents are already in place and/or on retainer. GM has already made the investment in enforcement and legal fees. Even Walt Disney has people under contract for the sole purpose of tracking down unauthorized use of their characters at places as innocuous as daycare centers. Have you ever been in vendor row at a Winston Cup race when word spreads down the line that someone's trailer has just been seized and their merchandise confiscated? The panic-stricken expressions on the faces are priceless.