Bonehead move by Ferrari
 

Using the Mcqueen name without paying a royalty? Oh, no....

https://autoweek.com/article/people/steve-mcqueens-family-sues-ferrari-over-mcqueen?utm_source=DailyDrive20180809&utm_medium=e newsletter&utm_term=headline-center&utm_content=body&utm_campaign=awdailydrive

Weird, you'd think Ferrari would know better. Also, I really don't associate McQueen with Ferrari. Porsche yes, Bullitt Mustang yes, but not Ferrari.

Don't forget my personal favorite....http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1533905743.jpg

I have a thing for old 3100 and 3600 series Chevys

Maybe they meant Lightning McQueen...

SM did have a Ferrari or 2.

I can assure you, Ford pays a royalty. One of the reasons I thought they wouldn't do another Bullitt model. That, plus Ford didn't sell the 7,000 car "limit" they placed on the '08-'09, plus the movie was made so long ago. I mean, how many young people even know who Steve Mcqueen was?

Considering the hoops that Ferrari requires for customers to jump through in order to protect the brand, this is probably going to be a field day for a smart legal team on the McQueen side of the table.

Wondering why it took two years? Maybe McQueen has been trying to get Ferrari to do the right thing, and compensate for the 5 cars that were sold? I mean, they changed the model from the McQueen to the Actor, so they knew they were in the wrong.

The 275 GTB convertible in the movie "Thomas Crown Affair" was SM's.

Was it a Steve McQueen heater hose that caused all the trouble?

(inside joke)

Hmmm Maybe Triumph could come out with a McQueen special edition?

No ****. I recall when there was that bizarre Ferrari crash on PCH a few years ago, someone took a cooling hose from the wreck and tried to sell it on eBay. Within hours, they were slapped with a cease and desist care of Ferrari.

It would be easy to demonstrate that Ferrari are not only aware of, but are extremely skilled at protecting their intellectual property. They'd rightly be crucified in court.

They did...and I do believe they paid a royalty...

Agreed, they are fast lawyer up.

I remember that. It was by local 914 owner. Good guy, he did it as a joke.

That was our own Howard Agency...still missed by many here, myself included. His ebay posting was hysterical. Feel sorry for those who missed it.

I am one of the few lucky guys to have lunch with such fine gent. on more then a few occasions. He's funny as hell in person. Very nice family too.

To be honest, calling it a Steve Mcqueen livery is far from giving it a model name or making it a trademark brand..
It's still a California T on all the papers.

Calling it "the McQueen" edition (which sounds stupid to me anyway) is not the big trademark infringement that will get the Chad a massive payout.

The name "McQueen" is not unique to Steve McQueen". There are many other things called "McQueen" and Chad does not own the name full stop.

If tomorrow I decide to name my cat Steve Mcqueen, and then sell pictures of my cat Steve, he got nothing on me.

And seriously , Other then being born the son of Steve, what has he ever done in life?
bunch of movies that nobody has seen or where nobody recognized him

Did a couple of races (not to bad) but then retired racing after a massive crash and since then been selling things with his dads name on it, McQueen Racing LLC.

Steve's been dead for almost 40 years now.. maybe he should start making a name of his own rather then mooch of his dads name.

The marketing rights to the name Steve McQueen belong to the McQueen family. This has been established. Thus, if someone profits from the use of the name, the McQueen family is entitled to a share of the profit.

It's the same with Elvis Presley or WC Fields or Richard M Nixon, as long as the family or trust has taken the necessary precautions.

I can imagine that if your cat Steve McQueen became an internet sensation making lots of money for it's handler, the McQueen lawyers would be happy to send you some correspondence! You could then lawyer up yourself and come up with a reasonable explanation as to why you named your cat Steve McQueen that doesn't infringe upon the rights of Steve McQueens family. Then a judge would decide and some lawyers would send out bills.

All my cats got a surname McQueen,
Got a bunch of them

Bob Mcqueen
Suzy Mcqueen
Roger Mcqueen
And now the last one I called him Steve, and it turns out he's a talented & photogenic little bastard..

Nothing to do with this dead actor who does not look anything like my cat, and my cat doesn't do anything that dead actor did.
My cat don't act, my cat don't race cars and he don't race bikes either.

Seriously marketing rights of a dead actor??
How long do those last?
It's not a copy right is it
There is no IP involved.

So all it is, is somebody who trademarked the name before somebody else did.
There have been a lot of attempts to trade mark something that really are taken to far

orange
snooki

or HD trying to trademark the sound of a revving engine.

Seriously, Steve McQueen is a frigging name.. it should not be protected on just that.
Maybe if it's used in combination with his dad's image , I might give it some credit.
Just the name? Get lost chad.

And the only 'live" trademarks i could find, do not apply on real cars
only on toy cars. motorcycles, sunglasses and entertainment, music, casino crap..

Has there ever been car with that name?
And can you keep a trademark alive if there is no company or product in that category active and making thingS?