Shelby and SAAC at Odds

Dave, thanks for the sincere insight -- appreciate that. I sincerely hope this will be worked out to everebody's satisfaction, esp the enthusiasts.

Dan

 

Carroll Shelby Interview and History film . Watching Cobra's and GT40's at speed still gives me goosebumps. With or without Carroll Shelby and/or SAAC, that will never change.

 

Does any one know if the full video is available for the Shelby Dodge series? I wonder what they had going with that black 600 coupe in the background. Is the Shelby Charger in the video Carroll's personal car? Is that 1st Shelby Charger built in '83?

robin

 

All those vids are very cool!!

CS just has such an easy way about him -- comes across as so genuine and what-you-see-is-what-you-get. When I was a child in the 50s he was already a seasoned hot-rodder and a world class driver.

Amazing person/life/career!

 

Its been said this is like a divorce and also we'll have to wait because there are things we don't know. I speculate that one thing we don't know is who drove the wedge between Shelby and SAAC. I'm sure there is a guilty party. Probably one at first and now others along with the paid legal help piling on. Whomever hammered this wedge to begin with should be recognized by both parties and their motives looked at. Shelby is not perfect and neither is SAAC but they are good people. Someone else has been stirring the smelly stuff. Just a thought ... don't want anyone printing any names here unless it comes out in the public record.

 

What's there to be guilty of? If Shelby was displeased for any reason he can terminate the agreement. In fact, either party can under the terms of the agreement as posted elsewhere. If it was Shelby, should he feel guilty for exercisig his legal rights for what he may feel is in his business' best interest?

Shelby isn't in non-compliance with the contract, is he?

 

Dave,

The disappointing thing for me, as an outsider with no bones to pick with either side, is that you had to "convince" Kopec to finally get a website. Yeah, the internet has only been around for . . . fifteen or twenty years? And why the need to "reinvigorate" the SAAC higher-ups? To me, that sounds strangely like the complaints that CS was lodging - that a club essentially representing his name and the cars he created was being run with a lot to be desired (no website, sporadic magazine / newsletter, etc., not even mentioning any disputes about the money or licensing).

Even if SAAC wins, their supporters ought to give a wink and nod of appreciation to CS for kicking certain people in the rear end to provide better for their membership.

 

If you go to the SAAC website the posts read like a political party subtly smashing an opponent.

Even Kopec is participating (bad form, IMO), for example, at SAAC's next big bash they're planning a dunking tank and guy who dresses up like CS (all black, texas hat, etc) so that folks can throw balls at the target and dunk him, with the proceeds from each shot going to their "legal defense fund." Actually, if all was good between the organizations, that would be humerous, but this is Kopec musing about it in the present climate. Could you imagine the outcry if Carrol Shelby himself were to have suggested a dunking tank at his recent 85th birthday bash and had someone dress made-up like Kopec as the mark? Very poor taste and shows where their feelings really are, imo.

And if you browse over there and read some of the posts, it's like a culture of CS disrespect. Folks removing their CS-sigend glove-box covers speculating that this will now raise the value of the car. Admittedly harmless, but indicative of their newfound and artificially apparent disdain for CS. As it turns out your observation (and I agree) and the SAAC website in general says more about why Shelby should be concerned, imo.

Of course, no of their subtle Shelby-bashing is illegal -- it's a free country. But I thought it was tacky for Kopec himself (and others) to be stimulating that climate.

---

By the way, in those three vids, does anyone know who the scruffy-bearded dude is in the second vid? Is that Kopec or someone else from SAAC or some other historic figure from the 80s? I just don;t recognize that fellow. Also, does anyone know who is interviewing CS in the first car-ride video?

Just curious... I followed things-Shelby/hi-po from the late 50s to the early 70s but tuned out during the 'dark' Detroit years of low-performance, so there's a lot of folks in that period I probably don't know.

Dan

 

Yes, the second vid is Kopec.

Mike

 

I have no control over what teamshelby does.....
It will stay...why wouldnt it?
Best Regards,
Vern

 

Ah, I see ...thanks, Mike.

Dan

 

I just noticed this post and since you ask questions I'll give you my take on some of them.

I don't think anyone needs permission to do a registry if they don't use the trademarked name of the product that is the subject of the registry. So, if I wanted to start a registry of all Ford Mustangs and could figurea out a way of doing that without using the name Ford or Mustang in any advertising, letterhead, literature, etc., there'd be no problem.

Elvis is dead. You can say anything you want about a dead man. There is no libel if he's dead unless it materially spills over to someone who is living. Shelby is not dead.

Lincoln, Kennedy and Gerald Ford are dead. You can write a book about someone who is living, but you potentially open yourself to libel. Also, Abraham Lincoln, Gerald Ford and JFK are not trademarks. So I can write a book about the Mustang, but if I plan on using that trademarked name in a manner that helps sell the book, or use it to solicit contributions or for profit in any way, that's can be a problem. For example, I certainly can not open a parts store and name it Joe's Mustang Parts, and Ford cracks down on such non-permitted/licensed trademark violations all the time.

Similarly, if I were to start up a Ford Mustang Automobile Club registry, I'd be in violation of Ford's IP rights because I'm presumeably using their marks in some form of business.

I'm not an IP lawyer, but I can assure you such violations are vigorously prosecuted on a regular basis.

Here's an example I read about some 20 years ago. I won't use the actual brand name here so let's use the word "Phony" to represent the large electronics company. Apparently there was a Mr. Phoney in City-X who owned a deli -- for decades! The name of the deli was Phoney Deli. Well, Phoney, the electronics company, didn't like his using their r-TM so they took him to court ...and won! The court ruled Mr. Phoney would have to rename his deli no beause the the Phoney company's trademark covered food establishments (it didn't) but because his establishment was adjacent to Phony Corp's studios and, because of that, Mr. Phony's deli was benefiting financially in so far as the public may plausably think that Phoney Deli net to Phoney Studios would be a related business (which it wasn't). Phoney Studios waved pursuing damages, but Mr. Phoney had to remove his own sirname from his deli even though it pre-existed in that location (but not the mark).

So next time you make a 'fair use' copy of a CD for your car and then later give it to someone else, you have violated that artist's/recording-co's IP rights. And virtually all those folks on e-bay who copy and sell old celebrity pics for a price are commiting an illegal act but hiding behind the supposition that some of those pics were specifically commissioned by the celebrity who also purchased exclusive rights (that's the assumption) so the original photographer (they contend) no longer have rights. Of course, they don't know that and the dead celibrity's family can't prove it because the image is not a reg-TM, so no one is prosecuting such examples.

I'm sure I only know a tiny fraction of the ins and outs of this subject, so take what I've said realizing that the specifics of every case are different -- but I find it a fascinating subject.

 

what law firm are you with?

 

I think the case of the name will hinge on history (30 years of use) and Shelbys prior approval for so many of those years. This is similiar to what happened with the trade dress issue over the shape/design of the AC Cobra body. To little action over to many years and it slipped away. Speculation on my part, I am not privy to information on either side.

As far as dead folks go, many heirs of celebritys are aggressively protecting their rights to the 'name', music or whatever. Buddy Hollys wife is suing someone right now that just wrote a book about him, not for the name, but for 'slander' of the name essentially (apparently the author is an ex girl friend of Holly).

 

None ...I'm not a lawyer.

 

Where did daltondavid's long one-paragraph post go? I was reading it and when I refreshed the screen it was gone!