2010 Yenko/SC Camaro

[Les Quam]

Jim,
No one is required to run down and obtain the federal trademark rights to their family name so they can use it or to prevent others from using it. Don Yenko didn't need a federal trademark or copyright license to slap his name on the side of the cars he sold. Nor did he need a federal trademark or copyright license to prevent others from using his name back in the day. When Don Yenko operated his business he had some form of business entity possibly an "S" or "C" corporation or perhaps a sole propreitorship? He would have filed documents with the state to operate his business that generates rights that precede yours. The Yenko estate has state rights to the Yenko name and logo back from the days the dealership was operating that clearly precede your rights. The fact they haven't yet tried to stop you from using their name in court is meaningless.

Thousands of quick buck artists every year obtain trademark rights to names until the families decide to take legal action and rectify the situation. My name is not a trademark and if you were using it to sell products I wouldn't need to trademark my name or challenge your trademark if you obtained one to stop you from using it there are other easier, quicker and less costly methods.

If I was advising the remaining Yenko family I would strongly encourage them to litigate and contest your use of their name and go after any profits you have made. The rights to a name or process are not won by a race to the trademark office.

Some names such as Barber are generic in nature and can't be licensed except to the extent they pertain to a specific person or entity. I can sell items such as "Barber" products as long as the products wouldn't lead people to believe they were genuine "Jim Barber" camaro products relating to you. If I owned a Chevy dealership and was building and selling Quam supercamaro's in Nevada just because I haven't obtained a federal trademark or copyright to "Quam supercamaro's" doesn't mean you can run down and obtain the trade mark rights and deceive people into thinking you are the creator of the "Quam supercamaro"


Trademarks, tradenames, patent law and copyright law are one of the most complex area's of law that even most lawyers have a tough time understanding. This post is but a simple discussion of a complex subject.

[quick-bowtie]

Although I wouldnt consider the new Yenko Camaro a Real Yenko or worth anymore than one I or anyone else could build, I think its CRAZY that people are whinning about rights to the NAME!!

Unless the YENKO family recieved big money from Classic Industries I think its total B.S. how they can come in and take a Name especially when there is surviving family.

If Tom is close to the family and they gave to OK to build some cars with there name on it then that should be the only thing that COUNTS! AMERICA IS SO SCREWED UP!!!!

Just like Valerie Harrell should own her name and The Gibbs should own theyre name Yenko should be the same and so on.

I know Id be more than happy to donate $500 to legal fund if it came to that and the Yenko family was on board.

Better yet why not build the cars to customer spec. and leave the decals in the trunk and let the customer put them on.. The your just selling a Super Tuned Camaro with a set of Yenko Decals in the trunk.

[Classic Automotive]

The decals in the trunk is splitting hairs, especially if they are/were designed for the new 2010 body, they are still part of the commercial package. If you purchased the exisiting decals that may be a different story. As for the name, I know the story of how Classic obtained it and do not feel I should disclose that detail simply to say they were not looking to obtain it. It happen through a business transaction. The trade mark facts were discussed here several years ago, and since they have not been challenged and they have a history of marketing and use the president is there. Those here that stated they have history with trademarks understand that you must show "use" of the mark PRIOR to applying.

[427bigblockvette]

To all... this is great advertising for the new 2010 Yenko Camaro, Berger Camaro, Nickey Camaro, Gibb Camaro, Henessey Camaro, and all other new Super Camaros I have not named. I can't wait to get my hands on one of these cars! I just don't understand all this complaining. This is AMERICA. We DO NOT live like some folks do in poverty abroad afraid to step outside our doors. Enjoy what we have here and don't get too caught up in this silly stuff. Life is too short. Everyone is a winner here!

[sYc]

No big secret, Mr. David Heth, who had registered the Yenko crest in 1995, lets just say, fell on hard times, letting the mark go, which Classic picked up.

Up until then, most folks, such as myself and supercar Collectables, acknowledged his rights to the Yenko crest. Intersting, and ironic, back then, that to get to Mr. Heth, one had to go through Classic.

It was during this transsition from David Heth and to Classic that the door became wide open for any and everybody (except diecast, which SC registered) to use the Yenko name, including the Yenko crest, in all shapes and sizes, on products of all kinds. As we speak, on Ebay, just in Ebay Motors, there are 859 products for sale related to Yenko, from t-shirts, stickers, stripe kits, valve covers, to cars, complete with stripes and emblems. And I think I am safe to say most do not have the approval of Classic to do so. And, if they do not have Classic's permission, has Classic made a legal challenge against their use of the Yenko name?

[Classic Automotive]

[ QUOTE ]
Jim,
No one is required to run down and obtain the federal trademark rights to their family name so they can use it or to prevent others from using it. Don Yenko didn't need a federal trademark or copyright license to slap his name on the side of the cars he sold. Nor did he need a federal trademark or copyright license to prevent others from using his name back in the day. When Don Yenko operated his business he had some form of business entity possibly an "S" or "C" corporation or perhaps a sole propreitorship? He would have filed documents with the state to operate his business that generates rights that precede yours. The Yenko estate has state rights to the Yenko name and logo back from the days the dealership was operating that clearly precede your rights. The fact they haven't yet tried to stop you from using their name in court is meaningless.

Thousands of quick buck artists every year obtain trademark rights to names until the families decide to take legal action and rectify the situation. My name is not a trademark and if you were using it to sell products I wouldn't need to trademark my name or challenge your trademark if you obtained one to stop you from using it there are other easier, quicker and less costly methods.

If I was advising the remaining Yenko family I would strongly encourage them to litigate and contest your use of their name and go after any profits you have made. The rights to a name or process are not won by a race to the trademark office.

Some names such as Barber are generic in nature and can't be licensed except to the extent they pertain to a specific person or entity. I can sell items such as "Barber" products as long as the products wouldn't lead people to believe they were genuine "Jim Barber" camaro products relating to you. If I owned a Chevy dealership and was building and selling Quam supercamaro's in Nevada just because I haven't obtained a federal trademark or copyright to "Quam supercamaro's" doesn't mean you can run down and obtain the trade mark rights and deceive people into thinking you are the creator of the "Quam supercamaro"


Trademarks, tradenames, patent law and copyright law are one of the most complex area's of law that even most lawyers have a tough time understanding. This post is but a simple discussion of a complex subject.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are confused....I don not have the name trademarked. See Tom's post below

[Les Quam]

I have no idea who has what name trade marked and I mean no one any disrespect but let me clarify my opinion and elaborate briefly.

When Don Yenko died he had property as all of will have when we pass. Some of Don Yenko's I imagine was real estate? Some was personal property like cars and personal effects. Some was probably contractual rights with Chevy etc? Some was in my opinion most clearly whats known as an intellectual property right also commonly known as a brand name he had created. When Don Yenko was killed ALL his property of every nature would have passed to his heirs through a trust if he had one or through a will or finally if no will or trust existed through the courts who would have divided up his property for him.

Don Yenko's heirs would have inherited all his property rights including the somewhat intangible intellectual property right of his Yenko brand name he had created, unless of course Don Yenko had before his death created a trust or will and assigned those rights to someone else? Assuming that is not the case one of Don Yenko's heirs right now today owns the imtellectual property rights to his brand name relating to his cars. Whether the heirs understand or know they own those property rights I have no idea?? Simply because the Yenko heirs have apparently not chosen to trade mark and protect their property rights does not mean they have lost or waived their rights to the property.

If someone else has in the meantime obtained some form of trade mark using the Yenko name that in my opinion does not in any way preclude the Yenko heirs from enforcing their property rights at a later date. I am aware of no statute of limitations?

In other words any of us can build new 5th generation camaros and call them Yenko's and sell them until the Yenko heirs decide to put a stop to it. Kind of like trespassing on someone's land, you can stay there until the owner throws you off. All of which is just my opinion.

As we all know if you find a lawyer and dangle some money in front of him he will go to court and file some paper for you and keep doing that until you run out of money.

[1970Bluel78]

[ QUOTE ]
I think some of you are missing the bigger picture. If we say no more Yenkos, Nickeys, Giibs, whatever, unless they are “real”, do we say the same thing about other cars from our past, such as nostalgia drag cars and Gassers, cars influenced by Old Reliable, Red Alert, Grumpy’s cars, Sox/Martin, or period built Gassers and altereds, etc? What about Hemis, Cobras, even modern street rods? IMO, no. As the values of these cars increase, both in $$ amounts and sentimental values, less and less folks are able to really enjoy their “real” cars, often times even afraid to show them. So do we just shut things down for the lack of “real” cars? I say no! Yes, when I attend a car show I prefer to see “real” musclecars, but enjoy looking at most everything, same as when I attend a nostalgia drag race, where I would rather watch cars from back in the day go down the track, but I enjoy the sights and sounds of all of the race cars. Tributes, clones, continuation cars, will never replace the real thing, but they can help our performance-based hobby survive, hopefully for future generations to enjoy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I think you are missing the picture. Making a period style gasser or FED etc is one thing.Even a clone of a famous race car and claiming it's a clone seems to be OK. Making a NEW car with performance up grades using an ICONIC name like Yenko is misleading to say the least. Maybe a lot of us old guys want to re live their youth and have a car they could not have then, but longed for, in a big way Dunno. I'll say it again. Don is passed and YENKO Chevrolet is gone also. Make a new model Camaro and call it something else. Now will you get some guys with a lot of money to buy one? Sure but it will never be a Yenko IMHO

[sYc]

[ QUOTE ]


You are confused....I don not have the name trademarked. See Tom's post below

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why are you and AMC here, and so against what we are trying to do? Wouldn't we all be better served if whoever is in charge of Classic was the one to present their case?

[Kim_Howie]

Mr. Bradley you have said this three times. I think we GOT IT!!