Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: ROVERTRACKS is no longer

  1. 6th September 2011, 07:28 PM #21
    TerryO's Avatar
    TerryO
    TerryO is offline Admin
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    3,775
    Total Downloaded
    0
    From my limited experience with defending / enforcing ownership of a business name the only real way to be reasonable certain you actually own a name /logo is through ownership of a registered Trade Mark. However if you knowingly allow someone to use your name /logo, even if it is a registerd Trade Mark, without taking action then you lose your right to have exclusive ownership of that name to those you allowed to use the name.

    It would be hard for LR to say they don't know about Aulro or any other entity or business that has Land Rover in it. Personally if I was in that position I wouldn't be asking for permission of anyone to use a name as it is equal to saying that they are the actual owners and you acknowledge that. It is up to that company/corporation to stop you, not for you to ask for permission.

    A registered trading name or company meens little when it comes to legal ownership of a name / logo.

    How big corporations get away with stopping people who have used similar or same names for any period of time knowingly, even after allowing others to use their name for years, is to just threaten with large expensive court actions that most individuals can't afford to defend so they give up and let themselves be bullied when chances are a court might find in their favour.

    cheers,
    Terry
    Cheers,
    Terry

    D1 V8 (Gone)
    D2a HSE V8 (Gone)
    D3 HSE TDV6 (Unfortunately Gone)
    D4 V8
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. 6th September 2011, 07:52 PM #22
    GEK064's Avatar
    GEK064
    GEK064 is offline Master Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Camden, NSW.
    Posts
    260
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Yes LR are bullies to pick on rovertracks but really governments have a lot to answer for in legislating such stupid laws allowing bullies to use the threat of huge litigation cost to get their way.

    IMO LR should be working with the aftermarket crowd to the betterment of the clients....a bit like apple does with it's products.
    1980 Series3 109 LWB - Hue.
    2012 Defender 90 - Danny.
    2012 Discovery 4 TD6 - Snowman.
    2012 Discovery 4 TD6 - Sandy.... built for comfort - Gone
    1999 V8 4.6lt Discovery SII - Black&Beautiful -Gone .
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. 6th September 2011, 08:28 PM #23
    slug_burner
    slug_burner is offline TopicToaster Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,024
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GEK064 View Post
    Yes LR are bullies to pick on rovertracks but really governments have a lot to answer for in legislating such stupid laws allowing bullies to use the threat of huge litigation cost to get their way.

    IMO LR should be working with the aftermarket crowd to the betterment of the clients....a bit like apple does with it's products.
    Absolutely, most vehicle manufacturers don't even want to know you after you hand over your money and have gone past what ever period the law requires for them to provide spares for.

    The people that go to suppliers like Rovertracks are not being drawn away from genuine parts, they are after something for a purpose not surpported by LR. I agree they should encourage peopleto supply parts they are not prepared to do so.

    A brand name is only as good as the products and support the company offers.

    Manufacturers of pirate parts using a known brand name were they set out to deceive the public with an inferio component resulting in damage to the brand should have the full force of the law applied to them.

    I hardly think that any company with Land Rover or parts thereof in their business name is trying to deceive anyone into thinking they are part of that company.

    Lawyers have got to have something to do.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. 6th September 2011, 08:30 PM #24
    newhue's Avatar
    newhue
    newhue is offline ChatterBox
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    2,535
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GEK064 View Post
    Yes LR are bullies to pick on rovertracks but really governments have a lot to answer for in legislating such stupid laws allowing bullies to use the threat of huge litigation cost to get their way.

    IMO LR should be working with the aftermarket crowd to the betterment of the clients....a bit like apple does with it's products.
    Apple and Land Rover.....Land Rover listen to customers, might win lotto one day as well.
    Jason

    2010 130 TDCi
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  5. 7th September 2011, 01:21 AM #25
    revor's Avatar
    revor
    revor is offline Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longmont, Colorado
    Posts
    117
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Thanks all for all the support!
    In the end it is silly, and LR is just pushing a little guy (and others of course) knowing we won't fight, simply because of the expense involved.
    Pretty funny on the other end of it as they are probably pay the attorney's office more in a month than I make in a year at RT.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
« Maxidrive Vac switch | Tax Advisor in Sydney (with UK and Aus knowledge) »

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules

Search AULRO.com ONLY!
 Search All the Web!