I recently posted a letter I received from Honda but have since removed it until I can feel somewhat more comfortable about the legal ramifications of doing so. Sorry about that. Once the issue is a little clearer I may restore it.

 

We are here to support you during this time. What ever you need, you know you only have to ask and the member will rally their support.

I know I will.

 

I think S2KCA set you up!

 

I was wondering about that... I posted a reply... checked mys2000 a few days later and couldn't access the thread...

 

I love your site and I love the s2k community that it encourages.

But Honda getting mad is the same as you not letting non-sponsers or even members posting commercial items for sale. Its
all about the money. If it wasn't this would not be your full time job and there would be no membership fee. Don't get me wrong I think it is well worth the twenty or so bucks to Join. But please take a look in the mirror before you start calling the kettle black.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ItalianBucwheat
[B]I love your site and I love the s2k community that it encourages.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Strike
[B]

The last time I checked there was no membership fee.

 

I checked the USPTO for confirmation of the registation of the mark in question. When I last check, some 6 or so months ago, the registration was in dispute. On Jan 7, 2003 that dispute period ended and (I believe) the registration was granted.

The implication as it applied to this site as far as the logo and name are concerned is obvious. My major concern, and the 10 million dollar question, is can the users and members of this site type the symbols S 2 0 0 0 in a message and put us in violatation of their rights to that mark.

When they say "Honda's trademarks must not be used on Internet websites..." does that preclude people from talking about the car? While it's not a simple matter to change the site it will be done but where do their rights end? Must I remove all occurances of S2000 that might appear on the site include occurances posted by users of the site?

I'd rather not get into whether AHM is a good boy or a bad boy. They clearly have rights and I intend to honor and respect them. It is however a very complex problem I'm not sure I'm able to solve on my own. These same questions are facing those who run any S2000 related web site or website which might use the term S2000 as it relates to automobiles. It's a complex issue. Where does the tradmark law end and the First Ammenment right to free speech take over? There is obviously a line there and I'll be honest in saying I have no idea where it is.

Can I say "S2000 Owner Community" or "S2000 Owners Club"? I know I can't use S2000 in the title of the site nor it's logo and so forth but beyond that I'm lost.

Also, what does "distinctive image of the Honda S2000" mean exactly? Does that preclude us from posting images, photographs, drawings or artistic works featuring an S2000? Is this a bonafide right of theirs or are they just tossing it in for good measure?

As you can see it's a thorny bush. What I really need right now is a lawyer who specilizes in trademark issues to answer these questions and more. If you know of any drop me a line. Dropping $250/hr for a trademark lawyer is not how I envisioned spending your membership funds.

As for s2kca I have no idea. It's more likely that AHM finally cleared the hurdles of registering the term and is now sending out letters to everyone on their hit list. We aren't the only one who got one of these. s2kca's web site is offline at last check so it's not inconceivable they got a letter too.

Please refrain from saying anything that AHM might take as detrimental to their business while we get to the bottom of this. I'd rather try to effect the necessary changes while remaining "on-the-air".

Thanks

 

cthree

I am curious about something. If an automobile reviewer reviews the S2000 and posts his or her comments on the internet, does the reviewer have to refrain from using the name "S2000" or posting images of the car? I can't imagine this to be the case, yet I fail to see how that differs from this sight's problems.

I think the real issue is to remove any thing that can be misconstrued as a relationship between this sight and AHM. If that is right, it shouldn't be too very difficult.

 

For what it's worth, NSXPrime has a pretty convincing NSX logo on their homepage... right next to a banner purchased by AHM.
Maybe you could contact the NSX guys and see what kind of deal they worked out.

Just a thought.