You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ford GT, Ford GT40 Name Discussion
- Thread starter Truck
- Start date
Re: Why did they name it that?
Lynn,
Ford never registered the GT40 wordmark. Actually, when we were researching other Frod marks, we saw that the very famous marks such as Mustang, Falcon, and Galaxie 500 were not registered until the 70s and 80s as I recall. It was not a general practice of the car companies at that time. When Peter Thorp of Safir Engineering began making the MkV in the early 1980s, he wanted his cars to be the only cars that could be called GT40 cars and be therefore genuine GT40 cars, and he applied for and was granted the GT40 wordmark registration. Lee Holman tried to get the mark cancelled in the early 1990s, his contention being that GT40 was a type of car -a generic designation of a car- and not a trademark. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruled against him with prejudice meaning that he lost and he could not challenge it again. I am happy to hear that he wishes to refrain from the discussion now. Obviously his argument of first use was not accepted either. There are also trademark issues regarding continuous use and abandonment that set a standard of the ability to obtain a trademark registration.
Bob
llarsen said:Bob,
I would like to ask about something that predates the whole Ford vs Safir thing. I have been approached several times concerning how Safir came to own the rights to the GT40 name, at least in the United States. Do you have anything you can share with us on that issue?
I have asked Lee Holman to participate in this thread, but he has apparently decided not to do that. Never the less, I think it is somewhat well known that he has opinions about the trademark applications process in gaining the rights to the moniker. The arguments seem to revolve around the description of exactly when and how the term GT40 came into use that Safir used in the US trademark application. I am not sure if there are others that share these opinions, but I, for one, would like to hear the Safir side of the story, if that is possible.
Thanks,
Lynn
Lynn,
Ford never registered the GT40 wordmark. Actually, when we were researching other Frod marks, we saw that the very famous marks such as Mustang, Falcon, and Galaxie 500 were not registered until the 70s and 80s as I recall. It was not a general practice of the car companies at that time. When Peter Thorp of Safir Engineering began making the MkV in the early 1980s, he wanted his cars to be the only cars that could be called GT40 cars and be therefore genuine GT40 cars, and he applied for and was granted the GT40 wordmark registration. Lee Holman tried to get the mark cancelled in the early 1990s, his contention being that GT40 was a type of car -a generic designation of a car- and not a trademark. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruled against him with prejudice meaning that he lost and he could not challenge it again. I am happy to hear that he wishes to refrain from the discussion now. Obviously his argument of first use was not accepted either. There are also trademark issues regarding continuous use and abandonment that set a standard of the ability to obtain a trademark registration.
Bob
Lynn Larsen
Lynn Larsen
Bob,
Thank you very much for responding. I think it is wonderful that the GT40 enthusiasts community has the opportunity to hear these tidbits of the car's history from the principals that were involved in its making.
Lynn
Thank you very much for responding. I think it is wonderful that the GT40 enthusiasts community has the opportunity to hear these tidbits of the car's history from the principals that were involved in its making.
Lynn
Lynn,
I posted a reply last week, however, it appears that I did something wrong and it did not appear in the thread.
When Peter Thorp began making the MkVs, he wanted his cars to have the only successive serial numbers and the only cars allowed to have the GT40 name. He then applied for a trademark registration in the USA and the UK. The UK denied his request as "GT" was widely used, and "40" is a number which was deemed to be not able to be registered as a trademark. The USA, however, did grant Safir Engineering (Peter Thorp) a registration. Prior to that time, "GT40" had never been registered by anyone, including Ford. As we subsequently researched Ford's registered trademarks, we learned that Ford never registered their very well known marks "Mustang", "Fairlane", "Falcon", and "Galaxie 500" until the '70s and '80s as I recall. I might not be precise on the specific marks and the times, however, suffice it to say that Ford was not concerned with registering trademarks of vehicle models, and certainly not interested in registering the name of an outdated racecar.
The USA, and other nations as well, require that an entity show continuous use of a trademark; not doing so for a period of now two years (it used to be three) constitutes abandonment. After that time period anyone can make an application to register the trademark, show "intent to use", be subjected to "opposition", and then be granted a registration. Ford never registered the mark, and then abandoned its use. The mark was available for anyone to register; anyone, that is, with a legitimate "intent to use", i.e., product on which to use the mark.
At the time, 1985, Peter Thorp told John Wilment that he was registering the mark, and Wilment had a 30 day "opposition period" to file an opposition and argue against Safir being allowed to register the mark. Lee Holman had the same opportunity. Neither filed an opposition
Lee Holman later filed a "cancellation" against the mark claiming that the term "GT40" was generic. He claimed that "pick up " describes a type of vehicle, and "GT40" just describes a type of vehicle. He lost his case with prejudice, meaning that he cannot bring a case against the mark again; prejudice meaning "prejudged". The next time that he brings a case against the mark the case has been "prejudged" that he will lose.
Ford never registered the mark, Ford stopped using the mark (abandoned the mark), and Safir applied for and was granted a registration for the mark for use on a product, the MkV.
Bob
I posted a reply last week, however, it appears that I did something wrong and it did not appear in the thread.
When Peter Thorp began making the MkVs, he wanted his cars to have the only successive serial numbers and the only cars allowed to have the GT40 name. He then applied for a trademark registration in the USA and the UK. The UK denied his request as "GT" was widely used, and "40" is a number which was deemed to be not able to be registered as a trademark. The USA, however, did grant Safir Engineering (Peter Thorp) a registration. Prior to that time, "GT40" had never been registered by anyone, including Ford. As we subsequently researched Ford's registered trademarks, we learned that Ford never registered their very well known marks "Mustang", "Fairlane", "Falcon", and "Galaxie 500" until the '70s and '80s as I recall. I might not be precise on the specific marks and the times, however, suffice it to say that Ford was not concerned with registering trademarks of vehicle models, and certainly not interested in registering the name of an outdated racecar.
The USA, and other nations as well, require that an entity show continuous use of a trademark; not doing so for a period of now two years (it used to be three) constitutes abandonment. After that time period anyone can make an application to register the trademark, show "intent to use", be subjected to "opposition", and then be granted a registration. Ford never registered the mark, and then abandoned its use. The mark was available for anyone to register; anyone, that is, with a legitimate "intent to use", i.e., product on which to use the mark.
At the time, 1985, Peter Thorp told John Wilment that he was registering the mark, and Wilment had a 30 day "opposition period" to file an opposition and argue against Safir being allowed to register the mark. Lee Holman had the same opportunity. Neither filed an opposition
Lee Holman later filed a "cancellation" against the mark claiming that the term "GT40" was generic. He claimed that "pick up " describes a type of vehicle, and "GT40" just describes a type of vehicle. He lost his case with prejudice, meaning that he cannot bring a case against the mark again; prejudice meaning "prejudged". The next time that he brings a case against the mark the case has been "prejudged" that he will lose.
Ford never registered the mark, Ford stopped using the mark (abandoned the mark), and Safir applied for and was granted a registration for the mark for use on a product, the MkV.
Bob
Lynn,
I am doing something incorrect for which I apologize. I have just done this answer twice. First I was instructed that I was either not logged in or that I was not granted access to the page, and then, having logged in again, was told that I posted the answer two times in 5 minutes. However, I do not see my answer? I am sorry for not being better at this!
I posted a reply last week, however, it appears that I did something wrong and it did not appear in the thread.
When Peter Thorp began making the MkVs, he wanted his cars to have the only successive serial numbers and the only cars allowed to have the GT40 name. He then applied for a trademark registration in the USA and the UK. The UK denied his request as "GT" was widely used, and "40" is a number which was deemed to be not able to be registered as a trademark. The USA, however, did grant Safir Engineering (Peter Thorp) a registration. Prior to that time, "GT40" had never been registered by anyone, including Ford. As we subsequently researched Ford's registered trademarks, we learned that Ford never registered their very well known marks "Mustang", "Fairlane", "Falcon", and "Galaxie 500" until the '70s and '80s as I recall. I might not be precise on the specific marks and the times, however, suffice it to say that Ford was not concerned with registering trademarks of vehicle models, and certainly not interested in registering the name of an outdated racecar.
The USA, and other nations as well, require that an entity show continuous use of a trademark; not doing so for a period of now two years (it used to be three) constitutes abandondment. After that time period anyone can make an application to register the trademark, show "intent to use", be subjected to "opposition", and then be granted a registration. Ford never registered the mark, and then abandonded its use. The mark was available for anyone to register; anyone, that is, with a legitimate "intent to use", i.e., product on which to use the mark.
At the time, 1985, Peter Thorp told John Wilment that he was registering the mark, and Wilment had a 30 day "opposition period" to file an opposition and argue against Safir being allowed to register the mark. Lee Holman had the same opportunity. Neither filed an opposition
Lee Holman later filed a "cancellation" against the mark claiming that the term "GT40" was generic. He claimed that "pick up " describes a type of vehicle, and "GT40" just describes a type of vehicle. He lost his case with prejudice, meaning that he cannot bring a case against the mark again; prejudice meaning "prejudged". The next time that he brings a case against the mark the case has been "prejudged" that he will lose.
Ford never registered the mark, Ford stopped using the mark (abandoned the mark), and Safir applied for and was granted a registration for the mark for use on a product, the MkV.
Bob
I am doing something incorrect for which I apologize. I have just done this answer twice. First I was instructed that I was either not logged in or that I was not granted access to the page, and then, having logged in again, was told that I posted the answer two times in 5 minutes. However, I do not see my answer? I am sorry for not being better at this!
I posted a reply last week, however, it appears that I did something wrong and it did not appear in the thread.
When Peter Thorp began making the MkVs, he wanted his cars to have the only successive serial numbers and the only cars allowed to have the GT40 name. He then applied for a trademark registration in the USA and the UK. The UK denied his request as "GT" was widely used, and "40" is a number which was deemed to be not able to be registered as a trademark. The USA, however, did grant Safir Engineering (Peter Thorp) a registration. Prior to that time, "GT40" had never been registered by anyone, including Ford. As we subsequently researched Ford's registered trademarks, we learned that Ford never registered their very well known marks "Mustang", "Fairlane", "Falcon", and "Galaxie 500" until the '70s and '80s as I recall. I might not be precise on the specific marks and the times, however, suffice it to say that Ford was not concerned with registering trademarks of vehicle models, and certainly not interested in registering the name of an outdated racecar.
The USA, and other nations as well, require that an entity show continuous use of a trademark; not doing so for a period of now two years (it used to be three) constitutes abandondment. After that time period anyone can make an application to register the trademark, show "intent to use", be subjected to "opposition", and then be granted a registration. Ford never registered the mark, and then abandonded its use. The mark was available for anyone to register; anyone, that is, with a legitimate "intent to use", i.e., product on which to use the mark.
At the time, 1985, Peter Thorp told John Wilment that he was registering the mark, and Wilment had a 30 day "opposition period" to file an opposition and argue against Safir being allowed to register the mark. Lee Holman had the same opportunity. Neither filed an opposition
Lee Holman later filed a "cancellation" against the mark claiming that the term "GT40" was generic. He claimed that "pick up " describes a type of vehicle, and "GT40" just describes a type of vehicle. He lost his case with prejudice, meaning that he cannot bring a case against the mark again; prejudice meaning "prejudged". The next time that he brings a case against the mark the case has been "prejudged" that he will lose.
Ford never registered the mark, Ford stopped using the mark (abandoned the mark), and Safir applied for and was granted a registration for the mark for use on a product, the MkV.
Bob
To all on the Forum, I apologize for my ineptness. I now have seen my post of last week. At least I said the same things both times!
Bob
Bob
Re: Why did they name it that?
Ron,
It should be called a "GT40", and that is just what we all wanted it called. I think that Ford does not want to spend any more time or money on the car/project. Production is done, and Ford, as we have seen, never cared about the "GT40" name at the time. If I thought that owners/the public/enthusiasts could contact Ford and influence their decisions, I would suggest that we do so. Safir would certainly try to work with Ford. However, as far as Bill Ford is concerned (through a third party he was contacted about a year ago), the project is done.
Bob
Hey Lynn,
Maybe we want to take some of these posts/threads and consolidate to a thread on naming the car? There are some others elsewhere on the forum that could be complied as well.
Ron
Ron,
It should be called a "GT40", and that is just what we all wanted it called. I think that Ford does not want to spend any more time or money on the car/project. Production is done, and Ford, as we have seen, never cared about the "GT40" name at the time. If I thought that owners/the public/enthusiasts could contact Ford and influence their decisions, I would suggest that we do so. Safir would certainly try to work with Ford. However, as far as Bill Ford is concerned (through a third party he was contacted about a year ago), the project is done.
Bob
Similar threads
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 597
- Replies
- 25
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 9
- Views
- 4K