Author Topic: bad for our hobby?  (Read 17469 times)

lakeholme

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2497
  • 68-12D L30/M35
    • View Profile
Re: bad for our hobby?
« Reply #15 on: July 03, 2007, 04:22:42 PM »
Is there any info. about the bill or how to get one introduced available?
Phillip, HNR & NCR-AACA, Senior Master, Team Captain, Admin.,
Spring Southeastern Nationals chair, AACA National Director

67camarorsss

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: bad for our hobby?
« Reply #16 on: July 17, 2007, 11:31:54 PM »
Since I never intend to advertise my car as other than what it is and since I did ALL of the mechanical work to it I have no qualms stating that it's a CLONE of a 396 RS/SS car. I bought it when they could be bought dirt cheap 20+ years ago and started changing things to what I wanted since it had no engine or tranny. I even scored a 67 12 bolt in the yard back in the early 80's. Although it's no doubt a 327 2V/PG car, it does have PDB, Tinted windows all around (1st line E), PW (1st line X - this is why I bought it in the 1st place), PS, Tilt steering wheel, 797-Z interior (Parchment/Black delux) and K-K exterior (Emerald Turquoise), a very unusual combination. If I hadn't had this car this long I doubt I would be able to get in at this time. If I ever sell it (probably not, it's like part of the family) it will be without the intention of selling an original, but then I'm honest in that respect. I feel sorry for the folks that got (or will get) ripped off buying something that isn't. Caveat Emptor was never truer than in this hobby.
- 1967 RS/SS 396/TH400 (loaded clone restification)
- 1998 Z28 LS1/M6 (daily driver)
- 2002 Z28 LS1/4L60E (12 sec toy/bookend to the 67)

KevinK

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 235
    • View Profile
    • Hudson Valley Camaro
Re: bad for our hobby?
« Reply #17 on: July 20, 2007, 11:59:18 AM »
  Whether or not GM was aware of the re-issueing of trim tags (I'm sure  they are/were), ...and/or whether or not they pursue those re-creating them, ......they have been contacted regarding this subject. At least I do know it has been passed on to their legal department, ...time will tell...

jdv69z

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1275
  • 69 RS Z/28 52E
    • View Profile
Re: bad for our hobby?
« Reply #18 on: July 20, 2007, 02:24:44 PM »
What motivation would GM have for getting involved in the fake trim tag issue? Their business is selling new cars. The cars involved in this issue are not new. For them to get involved would require legal expenses which they would  be unable to recover? What would be in it for them?

Jimmy V.
Jimmy V.

lakeholme

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2497
  • 68-12D L30/M35
    • View Profile
Re: bad for our hobby?
« Reply #19 on: July 20, 2007, 07:01:21 PM »
GM and their subsidiaries and suppliers would and should have a proprietary interest for their product, current or past.  There are proprietary interests in relation to both product and certain types of information, which are the subject of certain laws, including copyright, patents or trademarks.  The computer industry is constantly waging war over such things.  But you are right, it would be a legal and financial nightmare to prosecute cases like this.  Citizen action from folks like us and passing laws like the one mentioned above is the best route. 

Phillip, HNR & NCR-AACA, Senior Master, Team Captain, Admin.,
Spring Southeastern Nationals chair, AACA National Director

KevinK

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 235
    • View Profile
    • Hudson Valley Camaro
Re: bad for our hobby?
« Reply #20 on: July 23, 2007, 11:24:55 AM »
 ...I agree, ...the main thrust to stop this stuff will need to come from citizen action groups as you mention. With regard to GM, ...the fact that these tags have "General Motors" name on them would lead me to believe there must be some trademark/copyright issues. In as much as they may not want to get involved in (costly) legal battles, ...they may do something...