GermanLook Forums  

Go Back   GermanLook Forums > General > Off Topic

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old October 25th 2004, 23:58
Superman
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I filled out the trademark application at the link below and the quote was the reply.

http://www.vwtrademarks.com/license.aspx?type=club

Quote:
Congratulations!

Your application has been submitted for review!

VWoA will review each application individually to determine whether it meets our licensing requirements. After your License is reviewed, VWoA will send a message to you at the email address you supplied in your application advising you of our decision on your application. (It may take up to 30 days, so please be patient.)

If your License Application was approved the email message you receive will provide directions on how to finalize your application and digitally sign your license. Upon completing these steps, VWoA will grant you a License, with limited permission to use certain VW trademarks. Your license will identify those trademarks you are permitted to use and describe the exact manner in which the trademarks must be used. You may only use those trademarks listed in the manner described. This License is digitally stored for our records and you should print out a copy for your records.


As our licensee you have an obligation to keep our records current. The "Maintain your License" section of our site is where you do that. Changes may include things such as:

(1) a new residence or email address;
(2) requests for use of additional trademarks or logos;
(3) revision of your Club Events on VW.COM; or
(4) whether you desire to use VW Trademarks in any manner not described in your License.

Go to the "Maintain Your License" link in the menu and enter the User Name and Password that you selected when you filled out your application. Click "Login" and your application will be displayed. Make the necessary changes to the application and hit the "Save Application" button. VWoA will receive a notice of your requested changes and inform you by email if they are acceptable.

In the event your license application was rejected the email message will tell you that your application has been rejected and the reason(s) for the rejection. You will be provided with a link to a web page where you will be given the opportunity to modify your application and re-submit it to VWoA for review.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old October 26th 2004, 07:39
Steve C's Avatar
Steve C Steve C is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,666
Hi

Why is VWoA doing this and not Germany, I cant find any mention of this on the German website, is it because VWoA are more litigious?


Steve
__________________
STI powered 1303 in the works.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old October 26th 2004, 18:45
yetibone's Avatar
yetibone yetibone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve C
Hi

Why is VWoA doing this and not Germany, I cant find any mention of this on the German website, is it because VWoA are more litigious?


Steve
Contrary to popular belief, VWOA is more financially succsesful than VWAG. In Europe, Volkswagen is currently one of worst selling cars. Lamborghini, and Bently barely generate enough revenue to offset cost, so I'd imagine that protection of the Volkswagen moniker, to them, is the least of their worries, especially since VWOA pretty much has that action on lockdown. Here in America, VW is a good selling brand, and is worthy of some protection, but not to the extent they seem to want to go.

Yes, VWOA are more litigious, I guess because US courts seem to condone copyright litigation more so than in Europe.
__________________
Yetibone
'71 1302S 1.8
'73 1303S 2.3
'83 928S 4.7

Last edited by yetibone; October 26th 2004 at 18:49.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old October 26th 2004, 23:28
SuperRSi's Avatar
SuperRSi SuperRSi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 516
Funny you should say how well they are doing here, I read an article in a car magazine today how VWOA is on track to lose about 1.4 Billion US Dollars this year! Maybe they can charge us all $10.00 to be allowed to leave our VW logos on our Beetles...

Thanks,

Randy
__________________
Meyers Manx Signature #85 , 79 Convert
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old October 27th 2004, 10:59
NO_H2O's Avatar
NO_H2O NO_H2O is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Stockbridge, GA.
Posts: 2,810
That is funny. I know of many Aircooled VW folks that will not own a new VW just because of the VWOA's actions in the past 5 years. Nothing like pissin' off you oldest customer base. I sure do wish VWOA supported their old iron like say GM, Ford, etc, etc. I never hear of this kind-a stuff from folks that are in other classic car clubs/organizations.
__________________
NO_H2O
72 1302 Smack Black GL
73 Bus (2L CIS Powered)
66 Beetle, 73 Standard Beetle
72 Pinzgauer 710M
Volksport Kafer Gruppe
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old October 28th 2004, 11:05
oasis's Avatar
oasis oasis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: timonium, md usa
Posts: 1,290
The Volkwagen Beetle is a very unique animal in automotivedom. Just look at the ability to interchange parts across many model years as well as other air-cooled models coupled with how many were sold in 50-plus years. When one talks of generational differences in Thunderbirds or Corvettes, one talks about cars with virtually no compatability with their own namesake.

Because of this, there are huge numbers of people and businesses making money off of the Beetle, and this product alone.

I guarantee if there is someone making replacement parts for a Model T, they have an agreement with Ford. And if they don't, I guarantee Ford will notify them as soon as they find out.

And if this took place, few (by comparison to the VW air-cooled community) would know.

General Motors prevented Volkswagen from using Safari in North America for what became the Thing. Ferrari issued a cease and desist order to Aurora to prevent them from making slot cars with their likeness and name. Jaguar did the same to the NFL team located in Jacksonville until it got litigated into an agreement. And so on. It's pure folly to think companies don't defend their copyrights in the same way as Volkswagen. It is just that Volkswagen's past popularity translates into it's present-day hoopla.

Contrastingly, Ford let the copyright slide on the GT-40. Now, they are producing a car that looks like the former Le Mans winner but they can't call it that or even refer to it by name. Oh, they can show a clip or a pic of the Le Mans winner scurrying under the checkered flag or being doused in Dom Perignon. But they can't utter "GT-40" unless they get permission.

I know there are those who say, "Yeah, but in such-and-such case, what difference does it make? Why does Volkswagen have to be so vigilant?"

Simple answer: The law does not allow selective overlooking. If a trademark or copyright is allowed to be used by someone -- anyone -- in the public domain, it must be allowed to be used by everyone in the public domain.

In all cases, an agreement must be filed. Because of the complexities of state laws and federal laws, a fee is usually charged -- even if it is something like $1 per year. And you can bet that the agreement is going to be reviewable and renewable at the copyright's owner's whim.

So, some air-cooled fans won't buy a water-cooled car of the same heritage because of this? Why should Volkswagen care? It's not they want anyone alienated from their products. Heck, there are people who wouldn't own a VW because of the Hitler connection, even though no Volkswagen was ever built when Hitler was alive.

The reason Volkswagen is willing to have a few people with silly little grudges is because of the value of the copyright.

Imagine if every Volkswagen factory, every Volkswagen dealership, every Volkswagen period were somehow wiped from the face of the planet. The Volkswagen name, logos, copyrights, etc. would still be worth incredible millions.

That's what's worth defending.

And every company does it.

Last edited by oasis; October 28th 2004 at 11:10.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old October 28th 2004, 13:05
SuperRSi's Avatar
SuperRSi SuperRSi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 516
First of all Ford sold the name GT-40 and the rights to continue making the cars in serial number order to a company in England, who then years later refused to sell or allow Ford to come back and use the name.

And for Volkswagen it is the way the copyright is defended. There are nice ways and not so nice ways. For several years VWOA defended the copyright in vicious ways. Ask some of the advertisers who list in their ad copy that they no longer can show or say something VW related because of suits or decist orders. It is silly that they cannot show the front of a VW Samba just because there is a chrome VW logo on the front.

Of course manufacturers license the ability to reproduce parts. VWOA just deemed the licensing as too inconsequential to their business for too many years. Now they need to raise money any where they can. It appears VWOA is ready to try the nice way of enforcement. I think this is great.

If VW continues the downward spiral of less than enthusiatic vehicles and pricing, they themselves might wipe the factories off the face of the earth. How long can a company have losses as large as they are now having? It sometimes takes hitting rock bottom to help one reflect on what has been done wrong to get you there. Hopefully VWOA is set for change.

I still see this all as a function of most all large American companies having too many Lawyers on staff without enough to do. Maybe they should file the points off of each others teeth...

Thanks,

Randy
__________________
Meyers Manx Signature #85 , 79 Convert
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old October 28th 2004, 13:17
SuperRSi's Avatar
SuperRSi SuperRSi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 516
"So, some air-cooled fans won't buy a water-cooled car of the same heritage because of this? Why should Volkswagen care? It's not they want anyone alienated from their products. Heck, there are people who wouldn't own a VW because of the Hitler connection, even though no Volkswagen was ever built when Hitler was alive."

Forgot this response..

Why should they care? Perhaps because when you have a built-in fan base of MILLIONS, one should nurture them and urge them to help you while you help them. Why do you think GM pays so much attention to the owners of old GTO's, SS's, etc? Because they know their fans do not usually drive these to work and would not be seen dead in another brand vehicle. And get ready for the Chevy Power Tour next year...

And Hell there are people that won't buy Anything German because of the Hitler connection. Not something the manufacturers can do anything about now is there?

They need us and we need them. Capitalism is grand.

Thanks,

Randy
__________________
Meyers Manx Signature #85 , 79 Convert
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old October 28th 2004, 16:05
oasis's Avatar
oasis oasis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: timonium, md usa
Posts: 1,290
It's not a built-in fan base of MILLIONS who care, it's a noisy few. And most of them probably just don't like the new product anyway, or they don't like the discontinuation of the Mexican Beetles (which I think is mistake on VW's part, but that's another rant).

And please don't try to draw a connection between Volkswagen's need for restructuring and their copyright enforcement.

What GM does for SS, GTO, etc. owners has nothing to do with copyrights. But I will agree VWoA should (IMO) do more for current owners of their products -- whether it's a '71 1302 or an '02 Cabrio, two of the VWs I currently own. That, too, is another rant.

It's funny, though, that the great GM went after a company now called Wombat because HummBug sounded too close to Hummer. GM even forced Wombat to change their grill.

As far as the well-known magazine ad with the blacked-out "VW": I don't know the facts (both sides) to comment. It has the appearance of the advertiser violating a copyright law; VW wanting clarification, compensation, or otherwise; the advertiser essentially giving VW the well-known two-word send-off; VW saying, "Well then, cease and desist"; and the advertiser having the hissy fit response to show VW who has the last word using the blackout and accompanying caption.

The advertiser comes off as a company you don't want to have a disagreement with. Even if the above scenario is not the case, it still makes the advertiser look unprofessional.

What is a "nice" way to inform someone a copyright is being infringed upon? And if the response is, "Too bad," what is a nice way to proceed?

Yeah, I hate lawyers, too -- until I need one.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old October 28th 2004, 19:24
NO_H2O's Avatar
NO_H2O NO_H2O is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Stockbridge, GA.
Posts: 2,810
The way VWOA defended it's trademarks changed greatly about 5-6 years ago with a change of CEO's and slumping sales. They then came after clubs and parts vendors with a very hard hitting approach. Some venors just closed their door rather than pay the unbelievable settlements (Johny's Speed and Chrome, etc). Some ended up in bankruptcy (ie Rocky Mountain Motorworks). Sales fell further due in part to these actions. Then VWAG instructed VWOA to call off the Lawyer packs and worry about selling cars. So the trademark defence has gone back to a form more like it used to be, not quite but close.
Yes they should defend it, but not the way they did a short time ago. And yes they should be more supportive of their old iron,,,,,, it is what made the company. VWAG, Porsche, Audi and the others in the stable never pulled the kind of stuff VWOA did a few short years ago. If VWOA supported their old iron like Porsche does we would be much better off. And so would they.
__________________
NO_H2O
72 1302 Smack Black GL
73 Bus (2L CIS Powered)
66 Beetle, 73 Standard Beetle
72 Pinzgauer 710M
Volksport Kafer Gruppe

Last edited by NO_H2O; October 28th 2004 at 19:27.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old October 29th 2004, 00:58
SuperRSi's Avatar
SuperRSi SuperRSi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 516
What I am saying about GM (somewhat Ford) is they support rebuilding, shows and ownership in general of their old iron. They actively support the people who manufacture the repro parts and even make some themselves. You see the GM brand logos on bolts for Gods sake. I would love an R32, or an Audi TT done right (Porsche brakes+) but I will probably not buy one if VW does so little to support the brand and the hobby. I spent a delightful week this summer at the Porsche Parade, talk about support for old iron! And most of those millions of us that bought a Beetle when we could not afford anything else are looking for the replacement to the fun we had then. I think you are wrong to think most old Beetle owners are not still brand loyal. Fond memories last forever.

I also expect every manufacturer to protect their copyright, that's the only way to protect the brand. But yes there are nice ways to inform and educate those that you feel are in violation of your copyright. Just like there are nice ways to inform your neighbor not to plant the new tree three feet past his lot line onto your property. You can educate and illuminate or you can just find an a-hole attorney and sue him after you watch him dig the hole.

And you only need a lawyer when another one attacks, unless of course you start the attack with one...

Thanks,

Randy
__________________
Meyers Manx Signature #85 , 79 Convert
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old October 29th 2004, 06:51
oasis's Avatar
oasis oasis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: timonium, md usa
Posts: 1,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperRSi
And you only need a lawyer when another one attacks, unless of course you start the attack with one...
I needed one when I was falsely charged with a felony. I needed one when a former residence didn't return my security deposit. I needed one when terms of a contract wasn't observed by a former employer. If that's considered me starting an "attack" with one, so be it.

As far as the rest of it, I am probably more in agreement than disagreement with what you said. VWoA doesn't seem to give a stool sample on whether the past several cars I've owned -- including four currently -- are Volkswagens. They are not the reason I keep buying VWs. I have had great reliability with their cars. I have a mechanic who works on VWs and who I trust implicitly. And I learned to drive with my dad's '66 Beetle, so now I am reliving that fun with my '71.

All of which just has little if anything to do with the original e-mail. That's all.

- - - - -

I can't comment on particular companies going bankrupt because I don't know their situation to comment. If they existed innocently, then VWoA should be shameful in their acts. And there are laws against predatory practices. If these companies acted in a not-so-innocent fashion, there are still laws against predatory practices. Anti-trust laws are set up to work both ways.

(Now, if you want a juicy rant on two cornerstones of anti-trust law -- The Clayton Act and/or The Stafford Act -- and whether they actually do more harm than good, I'm all for it. I will comment on things I know something about.)
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old October 29th 2004, 08:46
zen's Avatar
zen zen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: atlanta, ga
Posts: 2,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by oasis
...I have a mechanic who works on VWs and who I trust implicitly...
hope he doesn't have "VW" in his name.

a good chat. good point and counter point and the is value in each post. again, i hold copyright dear to my heart and understand the consistent application of enforcement. that said, i still think there is a distinct difference between a company (shop, parts house, etc) and a club. why they are coming after the clubs is beyond me. and what gets me even more is the enforcement of the images. so we can put a calendar out and not have any of their buzz words anywhere in it, but just the image of a car makes it an infringement for a club? the law may be the law, but over-enforcement doesn't have it remain justice.
__________________
zen
'73 2316 TIV GL Standard Bug (quasi)


Company Branding, Graphic Design, and Web Services at DigiVinci Design
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old October 29th 2004, 09:37
NO_H2O's Avatar
NO_H2O NO_H2O is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Stockbridge, GA.
Posts: 2,810
I'm not ranting. Just putting out my feelings. I feel that they should defend their tradmark and get their share of of aftermarket fees. At least now clubs can use their logo, etc (with approval). Before you were just told to remove it or we will see you in court or you owe us this much for having used it.
__________________
NO_H2O
72 1302 Smack Black GL
73 Bus (2L CIS Powered)
66 Beetle, 73 Standard Beetle
72 Pinzgauer 710M
Volksport Kafer Gruppe
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old October 29th 2004, 19:42
Superman
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by oasis
there are people who wouldn't own a VW because of the Hitler connection, even though no Volkswagen was ever built when Hitler was alive.
There were lots of Volkswagen (Kdf-wagen) cars made during the war and that's why the factory was bombed. There was the Kommandar, a 4WD Bug, a 'Vert for field officers, the Schwimmwagen, the Kubelwagen 181 "Thing" and also the air-cooled motor was used in the Luftwaffe.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:56.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© www.GermanLook.net 2002-2017. All Rights Reserved