Ford: Car owners are pirates if they distribute pictures of their own cars

BeStRaFe · 14-01-2008, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Josh sez, "The folks at BMC (Black Mustang Club) automotive forum wanted to put together a calendar featuring members' cars, and print it through CafePress. Photos were submitted, the layout was set, and... CafePress notifies the site admin that pictures of Ford cars cannot be printed. Not just Ford logos, not just Mustang logos, the car -as a whole- is a Ford trademark and its image can't be reproduced without permission. So even though Ford has a lineup of enthusiasts who want to show off their Ford cars, the company is bent on alienating them. 'Them' being some of the most loyal owners and future buyers that they have. Or rather, that they had, because many have decided that they will not be doing business with Ford again if this matter isn't resolved."

http://www.bmcforums.com/showthread.php?t=42402

Quote:

I got some more info from the folks at cafepress and according to them, a law firm representing Ford contacted them saying that our calendar pics (and our club's event logos - anything with one of our cars in it) infringes on Ford's trademarks which include the use of images of THEIR vehicles. Also, Ford claims that all the images, logos and designs OUR graphics team made for the BMC events using Danni are theirs as well. Funny, I thought Danni's title had my name on it ... and I thought you guys owned your cars ... and, well ... I'm not even going to get into how wrong and unfair I feel this whole thing is as I'd be typing for hours, but I wholeheartedly echo everything you guys have been saying all afternoon. I'm not letting this go un-addressed and I'll keep you guys posted as I get to work on this.

I'm sorry, but at this point we will not be producing the 2008 BMC Calendar, featuring our 2007 Members of the Month, solely due to Ford Motor Company's claim that THEY own all rights to the photos YOU take of YOUR car. I hope to resolve this soon, and be able to provide the calendar and other BMC merchandise that you guys want and deserve! This thread will remain open for you to comment however you wish, and I'll update it as needed.

Thanks for all your support of the BMC!!

rag top · 14-01-2008, 06:12 PM

Sounds like Ford USA are doing to clubs what they tried doing to businesses that use their "trademark names" (eg mustang).

irlewy86 · 14-01-2008, 06:14 PM

Surely if the calender is not for profit then it dosen't matter?

nugget378 · 14-01-2008, 06:17 PM

Its got to be a crock,once you buy a car its YOURS not Fords,
They sold it to you..

rag top · 14-01-2008, 06:39 PM

Here is what they have tried in the past:
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=54350

troppo · 14-01-2008, 06:51 PM

If you want to take photo's of models while they are doing their thing, you will need to get them to sign a release before any photo's are published and most likely pay for the priviledge.

However, the paparazzi exist only because once those people are in public, they are fair game. I fail to see how a car is any different.

fmc351 · 14-01-2008, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troppo

If you want to take photo's of models while they are doing their thing, you will need to get them to sign a release before any photo's are published and most likely pay for the priviledge.

However, the paparazzi exist only because once those people are in public, they are fair game. I fail to see how a car is any different.

I know youre not saying Ford is right, but it is different than your example. The pap or anyone else taking snaps do not own the model.

The cars are actually the property of the respective owners.

yift · 14-01-2008, 08:09 PM

does this mean that having ford badges, falcon, mustang badges etc on our cars fall into this trademark issue since we are using their logos and car names to advertise their cars and products?

Laminge · 14-01-2008, 08:12 PM

Sounds like a member, ex member is having some fun.,

troppo · 14-01-2008, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

I know youre not saying Ford is right, but it is different than your example. The pap or anyone else taking snaps do not own the model.

The cars are actually the property of the respective owners.

For legal purposes, the model owns the model, which is why you need their signature on the release. Any person owns the copyright to any images of themselves, no matter who takes them...unless it happens in public. I'm not sure there is a difference

fmc351 · 14-01-2008, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troppo

For legal purposes, the model owns the model, which is why you need their signature on the release. Any person owns the copyright to any images of themselves, no matter who takes them...unless it happens in public. I'm not sure there is a difference

I may have missed your implication of Ford as the model. I was likening it to the owners of the Mustangs. As in...

The model has all rights (or agents by her signing the rights over) to her image, the papazzi have limited rights according to her location. Here, the photos are of cars and submitted by the respective cars owners, it wont matter where the car is.

The comparison I read in your post was more like me taking a photo of someone elses Mustang and using that without their permission. This situation is the owners themselves (or authorised 3rd parties) taking photos of their own cars and submitting them.

Youre probably looking along this line instead. Ford have sold the cars, and while those cars are out in public they are entitled to no more privacy than a model in their exposure to paparazzi.

Ford crack me up in reference to the Mustangs and the calendar. Its as if they are saying owners are not owners, they are merely holding the car under bailment. A bailment is a scary concept, its under that arrangement you leave a car at the mechanics, and you can revoke it at any time. Obviously that wont what they are claiming, that would suggest you arent buying a car when paying for a Ford, it will only be the image of the car and any rights to use its image. Owners still own the car, just not its images.

Jeeepers · 15-01-2008, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rag top

Sounds like Ford USA are doing to clubs what they tried doing to businesses that use their "trademark names" (eg mustang).

Not just the USA. Before my time with the club, when ORSM Ford Cruisers approached Ford with their newly designed club shirts, Ford said no to the Ford Logo unless it was altered from the original design. So on our club shirts, the lettering in the Ford logo is slightly different. A copyright issue taken too far.

irlewy86 · 15-01-2008, 09:53 AM

Somebody should inform the states using speed camera's that they are in breach of copyright laws.

Jayden · 15-01-2008, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irlewy86

Somebody should inform the states using speed camera's that they are in breach of copyright laws.

but they are not profiting from those pics

haha.. I made myself cry.

troppo · 15-01-2008, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

I may have missed your implication of Ford as the model. I was likening it to the owners of the Mustangs. As in...

The model has all rights (or agents by her signing the rights over) to her image, the papazzi have limited rights according to her location. Here, the photos are of cars and submitted by the respective cars owners, it wont matter where the car is.

The comparison I read in your post was more like me taking a photo of someone elses Mustang and using that without their permission. This situation is the owners themselves (or authorised 3rd parties) taking photos of their own cars and submitting them.

Youre probably looking along this line instead. Ford have sold the cars, and while those cars are out in public they are entitled to no more privacy than a model in their exposure to paparazzi.

Ford crack me up in reference to the Mustangs and the calendar. Its as if they are saying owners are not owners, they are merely holding the car under bailment. A bailment is a scary concept, its under that arrangement you leave a car at the mechanics, and you can revoke it at any time. Obviously that wont what they are claiming, that would suggest you arent buying a car when paying for a Ford, it will only be the image of the car and any rights to use its image. Owners still own the car, just not its images.

Similar lines of thinking but slightly different angles.
Firstly, the paparazzi are proof that ownership of images depends on location. Any photo's taken in public areas are the property of the photographer. In that respect, the model could be likened to the car itself. So yes, once the car is in public, the privacy rights are gone, just like celebs and the loophole exploited by the pap.

Which means that even if Ford owners don't legally own the rights to images of their cars, their is nothing to stop owners exploiting the same loophole and effectively becoming their own paparazzi. Or becoming like a magazine and hiring a professional to take the photo's for you, in which case the magazine owns the photo's.

But that's just a side issue and a possible way around the real problem, which is ownership of images not taken in public.

In that respect, the model should be like the owner of the car and should own the rights to images of it. Ford are like the parents, which makes for another good comparison. Both created a beautiful thing that people want to take photo's of, and both have certain legal rights and obligations over their creation including default ownership of image copyright. Legally, parents 'own' their children. However, once children hit 18, that ownership is transferred entirely to the new owner. Similarly, once you sell a car, you transfer all legal rights and obligations you had over that car to the new owner.

The only question is, do Ford do that? As in, does the first buyer of a new car ever really own all the rights and obligations to it, or is there some fine print that effectively means Ford is a perpetual model agency for images of their products?

Casablanca · 15-01-2008, 10:49 AM

that is utter bs i can't believe ford is trying to pull this.

Walkinshaw · 15-01-2008, 10:57 AM

this wont be Ford's doing.

Laminge · 15-01-2008, 11:01 AM

Oh its such a good laugh to watch the comments here, Im sure there is a "wally" in each of the images in question as well

troppo · 15-01-2008, 11:21 AM

I just had a thought...now my head hurts

That 'public' loophole I mentioned, isn't that the same one used by car magazines to publish spy shots of new models?

fmc351 · 15-01-2008, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by troppo

The only question is, do Ford do that? As in, does the first buyer of a new car ever really own all the rights and obligations to it, or is there some fine print that effectively means Ford is a perpetual model agency for images of their products?

Id say the argument does not try to question whether the owner owns the car itself, Id say thats a given and Ford would be foolish to question that. Id say Ford has no issue with owners taking pics for the same reasons most people have cameras, personal use.

What Ford is claiming is the calendar is outside that, its not simply displaying photos of owners cars, it is making use of the Mustang concept rather than individuals cars. Its the fact they are complied into a calendar that makes a difference.

troppo · 15-01-2008, 08:25 PM

Good point.

I can see Ford making a case arguing that because the calender is Mustang based (as you would expect from members of a Mustang club) and is for sale, then sales might be affected in some way due to Ford's promotion of their product over many years. Particularly if they intended to use the word Mustang which is in the club name, that might add an extra trademark breach.

Nikked · 15-01-2008, 08:31 PM

Sometimes i just lol at ford, and shake my head...

FGII-XR6 · 16-01-2008, 10:42 AM

when aufalcon.com shirts were done I approached Ford for permission to use the logo nad we were told that was ok providing it was not for profit. they even sent a hi res copy of the logo for us to use along with guideline on their rules for using the logo ( all simple and logical rules). this was all arranged in one day.
the tickford logo was a different issue as I had to get permission from FPV and that took weeks but we got there in the end

Quote:

Originally Posted by ORSMT

Not just the USA. Before my time with the club, when ORSM Ford Cruisers approached Ford with their newly designed club shirts, Ford said no to the Ford Logo unless it was altered from the original design. So on our club shirts, the lettering in the Ford logo is slightly different. A copyright issue taken too far.

the calander would come under merchandising and that would be the issue if they had approached ford first with the concept you'll find they would have been able to negotiate a way to do this but people will take short cuts and then blame others when it goes wrong

KooK · 16-01-2008, 11:53 AM

For anybody who missed it:

http://www.bmcforums.com/showthread.php?t=42820

wulos · 16-01-2008, 12:14 PM

Dunno if any of you have noticed the following.
http://www.adrants.com/2008/01/ford-...ts-returns.php
or the paragraph at the end

Quote:

UPDATE: The issue has been resolved. Ford Car Communication's Whitney Drake tells us "Mustang (and other car owners) can take pictures of their cars and make calendars and sell them to whomever they like. They can't however use Ford logos in the calendar." She further clarifies, "The club (Black Mustang Club) and cafe press (or another printer) now has permission to print the calendar. Apparently, CafePress misunderstood the intent of an earlier communication from Ford regarding the use of trademarks on other products they sold when it told Black Mustang Club it would not print its calendars.

Would appear that the printer was being cautious in its approach after having drawn the wrath of the Blue Oval previously....

Fev · 16-01-2008, 02:48 PM

does ford also try and sue news programs that feature all the police fords and other fords just randomly on the street?

||| · 16-01-2008, 02:58 PM

ford should put that little tm on all their cars if they dont like people doing this i mean really whats the point in annoying people who already bought your cars this is the sort of thing i expect from best & less but not a car company henry ford must be turning in his grave about this

Fev · 16-01-2008, 03:10 PM

lol next to every single badge, word and on every panel it has a little white or black TM.. it would be like driving a billboard lol