JPS to close down Face Book page as part of P' settlement

I am not surprised that Porsche would protect their marquee as noted. In light of this, I am guessing that other 356 replica manufacturers may be carrying a high dollar bond assuring that they don't put Porsche emblems on their replicas.

if JPS is not putting Porsche emblems on his cars, why are they coming down on him? Are they going to force him to stop making replicas all together?

Without being a party to the negotiations, all an outsider can do is speculate.  If John had pictures of his completed cars on his website with P emblems, P likely stated that he was gaining a market advantage illegally, i.e., by falsely advertising that his replicas were authentic Porsches.  

 

Corporate trademark infringement negotiations are usually very one-sided, not by accident, but by design.  BIG, well-funded company hires BIG, expensive law firm, who sends frightening letter to small company to stop infringing on big company's name/likeness/logo/shape, etc., or they will be sued in the nearest federal courthouse.  Small company almost always rolls over.  There are some exceptions, but not many, partly because small company has been waiting for the wolf to knock on the door for many years.

 

I personally have no emblems on my replica, with the exception of an Outlaw script, but we all have differing responses to the issue.  Mine is the right one for me, yours is the right one for you.  Caveat emptor. 

In Washingtom P also came down on ParkPlace LTD for re-selling VS Cars new and used.  All Speedster references / cars for sale were removed from their web last week.

 

 The two cars they had on the lot are no longer on display, and their staff has gone quiet on anything related to these cars.  Cars are now listed on craigslist w/ no reference to P.

 

Unfortunate.  

What about this site?

I believe that the issue is commercial venue sales not a hobbyist forum.

 

As if these cars are going to damage Porsche's sales numbers. 

 

 

Regardless of the product, companies need to protect their brand.  If not, a precedence is set and they can lose control of it. 

I have a friend who used to run a long gone plastics firm called "Penske Plastics". Roger Penske never trademarked his name, so he's fair game.

For the most part, this is just an annoyance to large companies, but something they have to stay vigilant on.

They make a stink, the small company caves, and life goes on.

As often, the only people that make out are the lawyers.

Funny - years ago (1990) I bought 4 replica "made in TAIWAN" Porsche hubcaps from JC Whitney.  They had both PORSCHE and STUTTGART on the emblem.  After one rusted severely in a year or so in the garage, I ordered a replacement and one for spare tire - they came sans PORSCHE.  The ones available now say neither PORSCHE nor STUTTGART!  I was surprised they would take on TAIWAN in a copyright suit or that TAIWAN would back down.

 

We need to have emblems made up that say POORSCHE so as not to offend them. 

Yes, Bob.  This is the same brain trust, that is well on their way to eliminating manual transmissions!

 

Replica speedster buyers are not the same consumer, as actual speedster buyers.  Further Porsche doesn't care about those buyers either, they, the 356a,b,c are just museum pieces.  The Macan, is holding the companies head above water.

 

Fools.

I am certainly not an Attorney ( I wouldn't have the friends I do)  However , it's not the emblem as anyone can put anything they want on a vehicle..it's a Company that affixes said emblem. Hell who's gonna sue who for the "male bag" hanging off the rear bumper of a pick up truck?...I know ...I know...That just isn't right but Ha!

Too bad they couldn't have put this much time and energy into their IMS bearing design.

 

Well said.

 

Here is what Mercedes will go to, in order to protect their copyrighted designs:

 

http://www.motor1.com/news/306...pyright-infringement

 

Maybe we should be thankful that Porsche is only objecting about emblems...

Factory Five Racing  aka FFR , spear headed copyright infringement of the Cobra (Against the late Mr Shelby)and after dolling a million plus in attorney / court fees won in the courts and set a standard in the US.

 

..........Too bad they couldn't have put this much time and energy into their IMS bearing design.................  "BOY ain't that the truth!"

So does this mean that anyone (business or private party) can no longer use the word 'Porsche' when advertising their 356 replica on ebay and other internet buy/sell sites?

glad I sold mine before this. MIATA time

It's about the name, logo and the badges (yes, those stinking badges).  The lawyers go after companies who they think are using the name, badges, and logo of the parent company.  JPS could easily remove the Porsche logo, the badges, and name from his FB page and he would be fine.

The lawyers say they are protecting the dilution of the brand.

There are ways around these bullying tactics.

Notice our site doesn't use the logo, the badges, or the parent name? JPS could follow suit and he would be fine. The lawyers would posture up... But quickly fade away. 

Ah... I see what's up. The lawyers are saying because customers can post images? Umm I think that's kind of sketchy. I'd bet there's more bullying than law behind this one.

I was in the pool a few days ago with a Boxter-driving lady that had been admiring my car and wondered about a trade.  When she found out that it was not an original, she lost interest, naturally.  In the course of conversation, however, she reported her car had experienced some kind of failure that began with a puff of smoke and ended five thousand dollars later.  Do you suppose that this was the infamous bearing failure I've heard so much about.  

Porsche has trademarked a number of terms:

 

Porsche, Porsche Crest, Porsche Design, 911, Spyder, Carrera, Targa, Tiptronic, Porsche Speedster, Varioram, CVTip, VarioCam, Boxster, Cayenne, Porsche Cayenne, Cayman, Panamera, Tequipment, "Porsche. There is no Substitute.", RS, Porsche Bike FS, Porsche Bike S, Pan Americana, PCCB, PCM, Technorad, Varrera, and other Porsche product names, model numbers, logos, commercial symbols, trade names and slogans are trademarks and the distinctive shapes of Porsche automobiles are trade dress of Dr.Ing. h.c. F.Porsche AG ("PAG") and are protected by U.S. and international trademark laws.

 

They have trademarked 'Porsche Speedster', but not the word Speedster itself, as that was used by a number of manufacturers. 

I have an engraved sign that I put up at car events for passersby to read which puts the "Porsche" Replica Speedster in perspective.

 

"This is not a real Porsche Speedster, it is a Replica Porsche Speedster. For you "Purists" that's all you need to know. You can walk away with that typical smirk on your face and know that i didn't spend as much money on my car as you did.

But here's the facts. Mine is not a "Garage Queen". I drive it almost every day. It's was cheaper to build (as a new car) than your restoration. It's most likely faster than yours. It handles better than yours (I have IRS) The body is non- rustable. It's lighter than yours. The replacement parts are ready-available at one eighth the cost. You won't see a Porsche emblem on my car because a real one like this is inferior. Thanks to American (first) and world wide aftermarket engineering, we make a better car than the original. Dr. Porsche had a great vision. We just improved on it.

If you would like to pull up along side of me on White Av. at 5 pm today with your antique, we will determine your fate".......

Hoss,

It sounds like she may have suffered a less serious problem if the fix was only $5K.  Typically an IMS failure creates the need for a replacement motor which are typically $9-15K. This pretty much totals the car, since most 1997-2005 Boxsters in my neighborhood are selling for $5-15K. Jake Raby makes replacement motors for them that are north of the 15K figure, but they're done right and bulletproofed with all of his aftermarket goodies.  Jake is probably the most knowledgeable guy in the U.S. with regard to any and all of the Boxster issues.

 

 

Sounds like she dropped a cigarette ash on the seat cushion.

 

 

 

But getting back to the question, "who is gonna sue who over the male bag..."? 

 

Well, as it turns out...

I suppose it's been said: the deal here is using trademarked items in your trade, and you do not own the trademark.  It is about selling something to make a profit in your business using somebody else's logo, or whatever.  It's OK to make something that looks like a Porsche Speedster, and it is even OK to drive one around with Porsche scripts, etc. attached, if you "attached the insignia yourself".  But, as a builder ( business entity), just do not advertise (show pictures) of items for sale that bear the other company's logo.  I think the "I did it myself" concept would extend to a private sale from one owner to another, outside of any in-fact commercial enterprise.  If that includes or excludes something like e-bay, I'm not certain.  If you are in fact a business on e-bay, then there might be trouble; if it's just you and the other guy, then I'd think that would not be an infringement.

 

After all, Porsche sells the GD scripts to whomsoever is willing to pay what they ask.  Once you have it and its yours, you can do as you please -- except start a business and and advertise and re-sell anything with the insignia attached.

Well said Kelly !

I don't see why JPS couldn't just delete any photos posted to the FB site.

Kelly's statement above is well said, but not particularly accurate.  Porsche owns, or claims to own, the rights to use many names associated with the marque, including, for our purposes, Porsche and Speedster.  They also own, or claim to own, the distinctive shapes of models 356, 911, etc.  Porsche has allowed the replica market to exist by not enforcing the above trade name, trade dress, and shape ownership rights.

 

We should all be aware that Porsche has the right to enforce their claims against anyone that they assert is infringing on their copyright claims.  This includes individual car owners, businesses, etc.  Of course, reality raises many concerns regarding enforcement, including unfavorable PR that would ensue and the impracticality of the defendant class size.  It's just not practical or economically feasible to try to enforce such claims against an unknown class of defendants that may number 10,000-15,000.

 

So, from a practical viewpoint, Kelly is correct that Porsche is unlikely to attempt enforcement at the level of individual car owners.  Moreover, that lack of enforcement may be one of Porsche's problems if they ever did try to enforce copyright claims on an individual level, as the court may find that Porsche's benign neglect allowed the aftermarket to grow, and they have now lost enforcement rights due to such neglect over an extended time period.  However, it is inaccurate to say that we are allowed to use Porsche scripts and shapes because we are private owners, and aren't making a profit from them.

 

None of us are privy to Porsche's internal posture on the issue of copyright claims. Will other businesses receive letters like JPS?  Unknown at this time.  One thing is pretty certain, though.  The more replicas driving around with Porsche emblems on them, the more likely Porsche is to take action.  Can we, as replica owners, anticipate a JPS letter in our mailbox?  Almost certainly not.  

 

The accepted legal fiction that individual owners are mounting Porsche scripts, not businesses, would have little effect on the trier of fact's opinion in a case of copyright infringement.  It is usually unwise to wave the red flag in the bull's face.

 

Bill, You make it sound as if JPS had lots of choices in this matter.  His practical choices were two: 1) do what Porsche says or 2) go to court.  He agreed to do what Porsche told him to do.  In his situation, I would have done the same. 

On the bit about buying a gen-U-ine Porsche insignia and putting it on my own car, be it a replica, or an old Chevy -- whatever --, and this being a trademark infringement.  I am no lawyer, and it seems Jim Kelly is (more power to him for that) so what I say is just gathered up from the ether, based in neither fact nor training -- maybe I watch too much TV.  But, the point is this:  When I do the application of the insignia, properly purchased, for my own enjoyment, where is the legal harm done?  If one (i.e., Porsche Inc.) chooses to bring suit, one is usually supposed to show harm, and therefore seeks redress in the courts, given that all other attempts at redress have failed.  For a business using the insignia in what passes for advertisement, and re-selling said insignia, the harm is plain to see.  For me riding around in my VW covered with oddly curved fiberglass, not so much.

 

I like the legal theory about benign neglect, not that there would be a firm statute of limitations here, but, for lack of a better word, there would be ample precedent. 

 

Also, I think Mr. Steele's business will not be harmed very much, if at all.

Kelly,

 

Porsche would cite trademark dilution as their cause of action if they sued you personally.  The well-accepted theory of trademark dilution is that overuse of the name, even in non-familiar venues, lessens its unique value, and diminishes plaintiff's expected return on his investment.  Famous trademarks, such as Porsche, have wide latitude in bringing suit to protect their names, brands, marques, etc.

 

This latitude means that, even if you named your restaurant (or other non-automotive use) Porche, or Porcshe, or Porsh, all words close to, but not the same, as Porsche, the holder of the copyright may successfully seek redress in federal court.  Case law shows that courts have been sympathetic to plaintiffs' claims that such usage confuses the public, and dilutes their trade name, thus potentially lowering the value of their common stock.

 

  

Obviously, above my pay grade, I'm out on this one.

MY 2 CENTS. WHY AFTER ALL THESE YEARS WOULD PORSCHE DO THIS. ME THINKS A NEW IN HOUSE ATTORNEY LOOKING TO MAKE A NAME FOR HIMSELF AT PORSCHE. THEY BRING IN NEW ATTORNEYS AND ASSIGN THEM ITEMS TO REVIEW AND FILTER.

 

I don't think so, Gerd.  These items are not routinely handled by corporate counsel.  Porsche will have one or two specific copyright/trademark attorneys that they use, who will work for outside firms and bill Porsche at about $1500/hour.  The decision to enforce or not enforce copyright is usually not made by the legal department, but by corporate.  By this, I mean that Legal already knows all there is to know about current statutes, case law, which federal courts are friendly to plaintiffs' actions, etc., as well as the facts of who is using what names, logos, shapes, etc.  They're not learning anything on a site like ours, since they already know the facts.  

 

The copyright attorneys in question are paid those obscene amounts because they are effective.  They will have some bright, young associates periodically researching recent court decisions, law review articles, federal statutes, US Code sections, etc. to stay current on the subject.  There are several search engines on line that have simplified these searches in the last few years. 

 

 

When one of the company's chosen litigators moves to a new firm, the Porsche account will go with them.  Peons like us would have to be able to read the tea leaves to know when/where a company like Porsche will bring suit against a potential defendant.  Sales, market share, currency exchange rates, insurance rates, foreign sales, yada, yada--lots of vegetables in the litigation stew.

I tried to get LL Bean to monogram a backpack for me with PORSCHE.  They actually called me and said they couldn't do it.  I told them it was for my daughter Mercedes Porsche but still no go.  I thought they refund my $ but instead I got the backpack sans monograming!

 

I still think they are PO'ed at French for taking the 901 model nomenclature for Peugeot - forcing Porsche to change it to 911!

No surprise at all re: LL Bean.

 

If Porsche has not licensed their logo to them, LL Bean would be nuts to use it!

One of my favorite trademark disputes...

 

Gun manufacturer Beretta sued General Motors when they introduced the Chevrolet Beretta. Beretta had a strong case as they had registered the trademark in the USA in 1954 and used it continuously.

 

GM lawyers apparently agreed. And the case settled out of court, with GM making a $500,000 donation to cancer research and acknowledging in all material that the name was used with Beretta's permission.

 

http://articles.latimes.com/19..._1_chevrolet-beretta

 

Companies invest millions in their brand. You can't berate them for protecting that investment.

 

If JPS was promoting cars with Porsche logos on them, Porsche was well within their rights to put a stop to it. Although I do agree with a previous post that if all the pictures were posted by owners and not by JPS, deleting all the offending pictures should have made both sides happy. Makes me think some of those pictures came from JPS, and not from owners.

For what it's worth...from the gallery on JPS's web site:

 

http://www.jps-motorsports.com...ce/maroonspdlfq.html

 

Sure looks like it says Porsche on the nose. ;-) And that's just one example. Many others are pictured as well.

FWIW, Porsche has not trademarked the word 'Speedster'; they trademarked 'Porsche Speedster'. 

 

Speedster is a generic term used by a number of manufacturers; therefore, Porsche cannot claim it as their own.

Bob, Here's one of the more famous one's. Auburn 1935 Speedster. Coincidentally , I found one posting referring to it as the 851 "SC" Speedster. 

Bob,

 

Google "Speedster trademark".  You may be surprised.