 
     |
| $$$$$$$$$$$$$ WOW! More updates on Fiero GT Tail light lens!!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ (Page 39/115) |
|
FIERO JOHN-WI
|
JAN 18, 08:31 AM
|
|
|
I haven't been following along on this problem with GM, so I don't know if it has been suggested. Did you ask Fiero Store what they had to do, or their deal with GM, because I saw recently they started making the fastback GT side windows. Just a thought......
|
|
|
fierogt28
|
JAN 18, 07:38 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by FIERO JOHN-WI:
I haven't been following along on this problem with GM, so I don't know if it has been suggested. Did you ask Fiero Store what they had to do, or their deal with GM, because I saw recently they started making the fastback GT side windows. Just a thought...... |
|
He has a valid point. 
|
|
|
|
kgoodyear
|
JAN 18, 07:57 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by fierogt28:
He has a valid point. |
|
I'm not going to second thought the quarter panel windows but they don't have Fiero or Pontiac on them. There is a big difference.
|
|
|
|
tazome
|
JAN 18, 08:36 PM
|
|
|
God i hope this dosen't turn in to another Elio Motors lol. iv have been wating 6 yrs , why not sell the lenes for off road use only like all the china made ones are for GM toyota ford etc, how come they get away from all of the lawers an legal stuf? I think GM really hate the fiero
|
|
|
|
kgoodyear
|
JAN 18, 08:44 PM
|
|
Please stop and relax! Let my team, .......George and I get on with our work.
------------------
Goody
The beauty of a solution lies in its simplicity[This message has been edited by kgoodyear (edited 01-18-2019).]
|
|
|
|
tazome
|
JAN 18, 08:52 PM
|
|
|
I remember back in the 90s VW an Porsche had a big law suit with all an anyone selling the parts that were not made from them , such as the VW bug hubcaps with the wolfsberg emblem on it or the VW / porsche emblem that was made in china / thailand. thank god i picked up a few sets from a VW store . when i went back in the store alot of the merchandise was gone , all around LA area , even now you cant buy parts for your NEW VW at autozone only dealer , it sucks [This message has been edited by tazome (edited 01-18-2019).]
|
|
|
|
JohnWPB
|
JAN 19, 01:27 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by George:
Please stop and relax! Let my team, .......George and I get on with our work.
|
|
GOOD advice George! I will patiently wait for further updates.
|
|
|
|
David Hambleton
|
JAN 19, 10:28 AM
|
|
Manufacturers spend time and money defending their registered names regardless of the direct financial losses or gains from the sale of authorized products.
Vehicle manufacturers accept liability risks inherent with their products. Substantial lawsuits and payouts sometimes result from product failures.
Lawyers pursue the deepest pockets that can be associated in any way with the product.
If an unauthorized product fails that displays a trademarked name or identification, the manufacturer may be found culpable simply for not taking action to prevent the use of the name.
Patent and trademark protection effectiveness is based on the owners' efforts to control use and prosecute offenders. Sometimes even similar names or symbols are successfully prosecuted.
Taillight lenses probably present minimal legal liability risk, but juries can be generous with the fortunes of large corporations, hence the seemingly unreasonable efforts to control the use of registered names.
I suspect GM doesn't anticipate their compensation will offset the expenses of authorizing the production of the lenses.
The system of 'interference' is a deterrent to the proliferation of unauthorized products that may be linked to the parent organization.
Where is the line drawn? In the sand...
On the other hand, a "manufacturer's authorized" designation can be a positive attribute in the market; it can elevate the perception of the level of quality or fitness for purpose of the product.
Kudos to Mr. Ken Goodyear on a well executed effort; hopefully the market will make his efforts worthwhile. (Ownership-wise, I'm strictly a notchback aficionado, so I'm just a spectator.)
|
|
|
|
kgoodyear
|
JAN 19, 10:37 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by David Hambleton:
Manufacturers spend time and money defending their registered names regardless of the direct financial losses or gains from the sale of authorized products.
Vehicle manufacturers accept liability risks inherent with their products. Substantial lawsuits and payouts sometimes result from product failures.
Lawyers pursue the deepest pockets that can be associated in any way with the product.
If an unauthorized product fails that displays a trademarked name or identification, the manufacturer may be found culpable simply for not taking action to prevent the use of the name.
Patent and trademark protection effectiveness is based on the owners' efforts to control use and prosecute offenders. Sometimes even similar names or symbols are successfully prosecuted.
Taillight lenses probably present minimal legal liability risk, but juries can be generous with the fortunes of large corporations, hence the seemingly unreasonable efforts to control the use of registered names.
I suspect GM doesn't anticipate their compensation will offset the expenses of authorizing the production of the lenses.
The system of 'interference' is a deterrent to the proliferation of unauthorized products that may be linked to the parent organization.
Where is the line drawn? In the sand...
On the other hand, a "manufacturer's authorized" designation can be a positive attribute in the market; it can elevate the perception of the level of quality or fitness for purpose of the product.
Kudos to Mr. Ken Goodyear on a well executed effort; hopefully the market will make his efforts worthwhile. (Ownership-wise, I'm strictly a notchback aficionado, so I'm just a spectator.) |
|
This is a GREAT explanation. Every word you have said is spot on and exactly what I have encountered. Thank you David!!!!
------------------
Goody
The beauty of a solution lies in its simplicity
|
|
|
|
Curtisk1060
|
FEB 05, 08:31 PM
|
|
|
I find it amazing that some but not all aftermarket products of Fieros and many vehicles DO NOT have to be "GM" certified. Most if not all of the Fiero store products are not stamped GM at all as well as many other aftermarket parts available over the internet, like door switches, relays, etc. why is this any different? I would not have asked them in the first place. I restore many types of GM vehicles over the past few years and only occasionally are the parts marked GM certified. GM seems to pick and choose what items they care to be paid for depending on who knows what...
|
|
|
