Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Studebaker Back In Business!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Studebaker Back In Business!

    Shop Target for products you will love from studebaker. Choose from contactless Same Day Delivery, Drive Up and more.


    Sorry, only home entertainment, but some seriously cool stuff!
    My hobby is needing a hobby.

  • #2
    No. It's just some Chinese outfit using the name without permission.
    Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

    Comment


    • #3
      ... and just like that, the discussion's over.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by studemax View Post
        No. It's just some Chinese outfit using the name without permission.
        Who brings the law suite? Someone must own the name legally.

        Dan

        Comment


        • #5
          Yup there's a lot to agonize over with Home Electronics branding. Most of the well respected audio names from the 70s have been sold off. JBL, Advent, Harman Kardon, AR and others. I doubt they will sell more radios just because of the Studebaker name, plus they paid a LITTLE respect to the brand with the retro styling.
          My hobby is needing a hobby.

          Comment


          • #6
            Who brings the law suite? Someone must own the name legally.
            No one mentioned lawsuit. The brand name Studebaker is now owned by Federal-Mogul, but it has not been used AS a brand name by them since 1979. And since no one is making cars and trucks with the Studebaker name.... There is no need for a lawsuit.

            Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by studemax View Post
              No. It's just some Chinese outfit using the name without permission.
              Company is long since dead. And the name holder, might have let the TM lapse. And if so, they don't have any say in the names use.
              Are you 100% sure F/M didn't let the tm lapse as it isn't worth the cost to keep it.?

              Comment


              • #8

                Meh, hifi was dead by the late 90's. the brands of the 70's were by then selling complete garbage, living off the name.
                Hifi is just about buried today, heck folks think a surround sound set up with a sound bar under the tv with 2"woofers and a separate 6" sub. playing compressed music digital files sounds great.
                re-ringing advent and ar speaker drivers because they use foam surrounds every 4 years gets old. veneered sawdust wood cabinets. It was all overpriced junk by the late 80's.
                Even the 70's models were no better.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Are you 100% sure F/M didn't let the tm lapse as it isn't worth the cost to keep it.?
                  What did I say? It hasn't been USED as a trademark since 1979 - that is the legal mechanism that concerns us. FM OWNS it, but they don't USE it. Therefore, they have no interest in a lawsuit, despite the illegal use of the trademark. There was a chain of restaurants known as "Studebakers" awhile back who was challenged, but since they didn't make car or trucks - the challenge was dropped. Technically - you could say that the term is now in the public domain.

                  Oh, yeah - Studebaker did NOT go out of business. They were folded into Worthington Industries years ago. They make stuff that isn't cars and trucks - namely industrial cleaning equipment, medical imaging appliances, and medical training supplies.

                  It's been about 10 years, but someone tried to bring back Studebaker in 2010 - making trucks. Turns out it was a rebodied Ford with a V-10, and since there was little interest by the market - only one was made.

                  Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by studemax View Post

                    What did I say? It hasn't been USED as a trademark since 1979 - that is the legal mechanism that concerns us. FM OWNS it, but they don't USE it. Therefore, they have no interest in a lawsuit, despite the illegal use of the trademark. There was a chain of restaurants known as "Studebakers" awhile back who was challenged, but since they didn't make car or trucks - the challenge was dropped. Technically - you could say that the term is now in the public domain.

                    Oh, yeah - Studebaker did NOT go out of business. They were folded into Worthington Industries years ago. They make stuff that isn't cars and trucks - namely industrial cleaning equipment, medical imaging appliances, and medical training supplies.

                    It's been about 10 years, but someone tried to bring back Studebaker in 2010 - making trucks. Turns out it was a rebodied Ford with a V-10, and since there was little interest by the market - only one was made.
                    if THEY DON'T KEEP THE TRADEMARK CURRENT. AND PAY TO DO SO. they DON'T own the name as far as the it's use.
                    therefore it isn't illegal to slap it on anything.

                    Sorry. stewie. g.m. has to pay to keep the tm and legal ownership of Pontiac/Oldsmobile/Saturn/ETC if they don't anyone can t.m. it, and use them.
                    Same with Studebaker. IF F/M has not paid to keep the name and t.m. they WILLINGLY let it go.
                    and as seen as you don't know if they have or have not, other than your OPINION of it.
                    I'm going with F/M has better things to spend money on than a auto brand that they will never use and profit from.
                    And if they DO, still own the name and t.m. and kept it current and don't bother to stop the names use in the usa.. they will loose it anyways.
                    I doubt they are going to bother with the cost and court (time is money) to bother if they have kept the t.m./name current.
                    unless you have a link to F/M last t.m. filing for the name and t.m.
                    and they are not sending a legal letter to the company AND target.
                    one would have to say. you're wrong.
                    ymmv
                    see sig for more info
                    Last edited by JamesMayberryIII; February 24, 2019, 07:29 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by JamesMayberryIII View Post
                      Meh, hifi was dead by the late 90's. the brands of the 70's were by then selling complete garbage, living off the name.
                      Hifi is just about buried today, heck folks think a surround sound set up with a sound bar under the tv with 2"woofers and a separate 6" sub. playing compressed music digital files sounds great.
                      re-ringing advent and ar speaker drivers because they use foam surrounds every 4 years gets old. veneered sawdust wood cabinets. It was all overpriced junk by the late 80's.
                      Even the 70's models were no better.
                      As usual, everything sucks, except James.
                      My hobby is needing a hobby.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        So Mayberry is basically saying I'm wrong, and then proving my argument using different words. Make up your damn mind.
                        Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by studemax View Post
                          so mayberry is basically saying i'm wrong, and then proving my argument using different words. Make up your damn mind.
                          all bow to the ruler of studbaker. That last and only word allowed. Right stewie

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            ALL BOW TO THE RULER OF STUDBAKER. THAT LAST AND ONLY WORD ALLOWED.
                            Now you got the idea... Kiss my ring!
                            Last edited by studemax; February 24, 2019, 10:17 AM.
                            Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Why buy an obvious fake from a lousy joint like Target when you could just buy a real antique portable radio?

                              I'm entertained by some of my younger relatives who condescendingly act like they've reinvented the world of style when they show up with cheap retro knockoff crap "inspired" by sixty-year-old designs.

                              My guess is that there's a licence deal for use of the brand. (although they seem to debate this stuff over on the Studebaker forum. http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.c...he-Avanti-name

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X