I say we torch a few mustanks maybe a crownsticks or two perhaps a GT4O and a Model Teas (names altered to protect myself from criminal prosecution) then use them in a 2008 calender.
IP: Logged
06:57 PM
Fiero5 Member
Posts: 8882 From: Arecibo, PR Registered: Jun 2000
Well, Ford just got bumped by Toyota who passed them as the second biggest in car sales, so it looks like Ford obviously wants to commit total suicide now by biting the hands that feed them
I wonder what the real story is, anybody that knows almost next to nothing about copyright knows that the person who physically takes the picture owns the rights to it. Anything in the public arena is fair game to take pictures of and do with as you please, except for marketing.
The logo thing is probably right as if they are using any part of the actual Ford logo. I think they must be crazy to pick on a Ford club though.
I wonder what the real story is, anybody that knows almost next to nothing about copyright knows that the person who physically takes the picture owns the rights to it. Anything in the public arena is fair game to take pictures of and do with as you please, except for marketing.
The logo thing is probably right as if they are using any part of the actual Ford logo. I think they must be crazy to pick on a Ford club though.
I say we burn fords anyway as a from of protest. If we dont our fieros may be next... Naturally they will do it spontaneously.
IP: Logged
07:44 PM
carnut122 Member
Posts: 9122 From: Waleska, GA, USA Registered: Jan 2004
That's too bad. Those were great looking cars and free advertisement. Now they have mad customers and no free advertisement. Duh! As a teacher, I might have bought that calendar for my classroom, thus exposing 86 soon-to-be drivers to Mustangs.
IP: Logged
07:51 PM
Saxman Member
Posts: 5155 From: Melbourne, FL Registered: May 2005
When they came for the Fords, I said nothing, as I don't own a Ford. When they came for the Honda's, I said nothing, because I don't own a Honda. When they came for the Toyotas....I said nothing, because I don't own a Toyopet. When they came for my Fiero, there was no one left to speak up for me.
When they came for the Fords, I said nothing, as I don't own a Ford. When they came for the Honda's, I said nothing, because I don't own a Honda. When they came for the Toyotas....I said nothing, because I don't own a Toyopet. When they came for my Fiero, there was no one left to speak up for me.
Well said, but I still don't like Toyota's, Honda's or Fords
IP: Logged
08:32 PM
Fiero5 Member
Posts: 8882 From: Arecibo, PR Registered: Jun 2000
I am always surprised when someone who does not own a certain car bashes it or blankets it under a brand name, like all Fords suck. We have all seen members on here go in droves to other forum sites when some unknowledgeable person starts bashing a Fiero, and yet we then watch as many of those same members on here then bash some other car on this forum. I will note that in this thread so far it "appears" that most members are saying things in jest (seeing the smilies after the comments for example).
Now, I don't cheer for every football team, but that doesn't mean I can't give deserved props to certain players on other teams. Same for cars. Ford may be doing some stupid things, well.. actually they are doing some really stupid things lately, but still. Hold them accountable, don't take it out on the cars. Hey, lets face it, GM canceled the Fiero. How stupid was that? Actually they killed the Firebird too All car manufacturers at some point have had their problems with certain models, had recalls, etc.
Maybe when someone says something mean or insulting about another car it is just in jest. I own a few muscle/sports car books and enjoy from time to time flipping through them and looking at the many great cars and different styles/models that have been produced through the years. I love cars. I love owning them, I love driving them and taking them on cruises and to shows. I have owned quite a variety of different sports cars through the years including Mustangs and I enjoy Stangs as much as any other sports car. I will admit that I like some model styles more than others, but for the right price.... My current Mustang is a 2001 yellow GT convertible that currently has only 33,000 miles and it is a well built car and a thrill to drive. Sorry for the rant, I will step off my soap box now
[This message has been edited by Fiero5 (edited 01-10-2008).]
IP: Logged
09:06 PM
Wht&BluGT Member
Posts: 1175 From: Waterford, MI Registered: Jan 2005
^^^Well I think most of it has to do with what our parents, grandparents, etc. owned. My grandfather worked for GMAC so my dad and his 5 other siblings aways had a GM product, be it a new Corvette or Camaro, or a Caviler. And that has carried on to me and my sister (granted she drives a Miata, which is in a way a product of Ford), we will probably only buy GM products like my parents and my grandparents.
[This message has been edited by Wht&BluGT (edited 01-10-2008).]
I am always surprised when someone who does not own a certain car bashes it or blankets it under a brand name, like all Fords suck.
Said I didn't like them, not that they suck. My choice right, in fact I was playing with a newer Mustang the other day and it sounded great and looks great but I don't want one. I have owned 3 Fords, 5 Dodges, 6 Chevy's and 7 Pontiac's. Worked on 3 Toyota's but never owned one myself. I guess I should have used a few more smilies
IP: Logged
09:22 PM
Raydar Member
Posts: 41355 From: Carrollton GA. Out in the... country. Registered: Oct 1999
We'll see how this works out. ----------------------------------
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve" <xxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <AEeditors@autoextremist.com> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 9:29 PM Subject: Ford shoots itself in the foot, yet again...
You guys have got to check this out. The Readers Digest version is that Ford is claiming ownership of pictures *that owners have taken of their own cars* and is forbidding Cafe Press to publish an enthusiast calendar with those pictures.
Way to go. Alienate the few customers that you have left, right before the Camaro and Challenger show up. Dumbshits.
I don't have the means to verify this, of course. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that you guys have the necessary connections. Please let the world know.
Thanks! And keep on keepin' on.
Steve H - Douglasville GA --------------------------------------- See if it gets mentioned next Wednesday on www.autoextremist.com They tend to not play.
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 01-10-2008).]
Technically, they do. However it will only breed bad feelings towards them.
please explain how they own the copyright to photos they did not take. As a photographer, I own all the rights to the photos i have taken. Unless Ford purchased those photos from the people taking them, they do not own the rights to the induvidual's photographs.
------------------ My Photography My Designs 87 Fiero GT 5-speed. 99 CSVT 5-speed.On life support, waiting its fate 99 Accord 5-speed (Annonomity)
I don't even own a Ford anymore, but that did not stop me from firing off an email to their marketing department asking what they are thinking. It looks like everyone that has emailed them has gotten a typical 'canned' response, so I look to get the same thing back. I'll let you know what they say.
IP: Logged
11:32 PM
Flamberge Member
Posts: 4268 From: Terra Sancta, TX Registered: Oct 2001
please explain how they own the copyright to photos they did not take. As a photographer, I own all the rights to the photos i have taken. Unless Ford purchased those photos from the people taking them, they do not own the rights to the induvidual's photographs.
That's not 100% accurate. If you take a picture of a supermodel, you don't own the right to use the sell the picture or use it for anything but private use without her consent. This is because she owns what she looks like. That is why photographers make models sign release forms (and often have to pay them as well) to use the photo.
Also, there was a case awhile back where the City of Denver batted around the idea of making anyone using a picture of the city's skyline pay royalties on those images, because they were Denver. However, the legalities of that one fizzled because then the architects also got involved that designed each of the buildings, as did the owners of the buildings themselves. I never heard anything more about it, so they must have dropped the suit.
As for Ford...it's a bad move on their part. They could probably make a case for it, although it is doubtful they would win. But why would anyone buy a car from a company that sued them for having the audacity of publishing a picture of the car that person bought from Ford?
That's not 100% accurate. If you take a picture of a supermodel, you don't own the right to use the sell the picture or use it for anything but private use without her consent. This is because she owns what she looks like. That is why photographers make models sign release forms (and often have to pay them as well) to use the photo.
Flamberge
True... Except when it is done in the "public domain" and especially when the person is taking a picture of their own property.
True... Except when it is done in the "public domain" and especially when the person is taking a picture of their own property.
Exactly. I said this in so many words earlier and it is a flat fact.
The super model owning the rights theory only comes into play if you were to attempt to use the picture to sell or depict a product. In regards to tabloid magazines or selling news papers etc, they can use a picture of anything, you or anybody else as long as it is not in add form. If you are not inside your house you have no right to privacy, and even that is slipping away.
But oh no, let's argue with the professional photographer about the key factor in how he makes a living.
I will however add that in this case we are all on third or fourth generation information and since they were to my understanding using all or part of the Ford logo in or on their calendar Ford can stop them from selling it. The pictures? well we don't really know the story on that, things have a way of being exaggerated. The claim that they claim ownership seems far fetched to me
That's not 100% accurate. If you take a picture of a supermodel, you don't own the right to use the sell the picture or use it for anything but private use without her consent. This is because she owns what she looks like. That is why photographers make models sign release forms (and often have to pay them as well) to use the photo.
yeah, the thing is though, is that everyone in the calandar has expressed their consent to using thei photos of their cars. i do understandthe thing about logos and trademarks, but for them to actually say that they own the rights to the photographs of peoples personal belongings? thats like me taking a photo of my neice's trike and having huffy say they owned it.
Now with it being published and whatnot, the logo argument is a lot more viable, but to say they owned the photographs since it had a ford mustang in it is wrong.
but i agree, Ford is making a poor move on this part. this story is going to spread like wildfire through the automotive community, and it will only hurt Ford.
IP: Logged
12:25 AM
Joe Torma Member
Posts: 3485 From: Hillsborough, NJ USA Registered: Jul 2001
Well, then, if Ford owns the rights to the "car's image," then I suggest that a class action lawsuit be started. Those Mustangs say "Ford" on them, and Ford is not paying the owners any advertising compensation are they?
[This message has been edited by Joe Torma (edited 01-11-2008).]
Well, then, if Ford owns the rights to the "car," then I suggest that a class action lawsuit be started. Those Mustangs say "Ford" on them, and Ford is not paying the owners any advertising compensation are they?
and since ford owns them, shouldnt they make the car payments as well?
IP: Logged
12:30 AM
craigsfiero2007 Member
Posts: 3979 From: Livermore, ME Registered: Aug 2007
Maybe GM will try this with the Fiero store calendars. How utterly ridiculous.
I know GM won't get that desprate for money or be that stupid. Ford bit the hands that feed them and very hard. They attacked a Mustang club, not smart, next thing you know everyone in that club will sell their Mustangs and buy GM or something else. What Ford just did just swayed me from buying another Mustang, I don't want to get sued for posting pictures of my Mustang on Cardomain or Myspace, oh well more money for my Fiero GT.
Could it be they had a ford logo on their calender? That would surely be a violation of property and copy rights.
You aren't allowed to use the Ford logo itself anywhere without consent from them. Now if you bought the car you do have a limited right to the logo by virtue of the fact it has been affixed to the car and you own it.
Just like our calender cant have Pontiac logo splashed all over the place. It's okay to use the words Pontiac and Fiero because thats what we own but adornments like the trademarked logos are out of the question.
Cliff used the turbo wheel as the logo for the forum which is in no way a copyrighted symbol or logo... unless Cliff has claimed the rights to it... Money.
IP: Logged
12:36 AM
PFF
System Bot
craigsfiero2007 Member
Posts: 3979 From: Livermore, ME Registered: Aug 2007
Could it be they had a ford logo on their calender? That would surely be a violation of property and copy rights. ...
Just like our calender cant have Pontiac logo splashed all over the place. It's okay to use the words Pontiac and Fiero because thats what we own but adornments like the trademarked logos are out of the question.
It sounds like Ford's claiming rights to the shape of the vehicle and the name.
Good thing I only sell spiral bound paper with a drilled hole. The images are included at no charge.
IP: Logged
01:24 AM
Chris Hodson Member
Posts: 3101 From: Carpentersville Registered: Aug 2006
How utterly ridiculous.
