Karma Automotive LLC sues Reimagined Automotive LLC

[Malevy]

Marc,
In all my experience in the community, even with new owners, no one is confused about DMC. That's utterly ridiculous. You may want to stop promoting this mantra, because is starting to sound purposefully defamatory/ libelous.

all of your experience? We talking months, maybe years? because I measure my time in decades. If you think "no one is confused" you are either lying or don't read any of the articles of the past 20 years outside of the community.

For something to be libelous, it has to be untrue.

Does the family have a claim against DeLorean (Performance) Industries for using the DeLorean name?

I have not given it any thought.

On clarity in the marketplace: Why did Josh Bengston change the name of his business from "McFly Motorsports" to the current name which has DeLorean as the first word?

Speaking of confusion, the only confusion that I heard from the community is with Josh naming his performance levels "Spec 1,2,3" versus DMC's Stage 1,2,3. The opinion is that it is just a rip off of DMC's naming convention. Maybe that was the goal?

No idea why Bengston changed his business name, ask him? I don't deny that having the name "DeLorean" helps to better identify what the business does, but I have never seen an article even implying that DPI has any connection to the company started by John DeLorean.

Bengston, Steger, Peterson, Bernstein, Lore, or anyone else who has used "DeLorean" in their company name did not call themselves "DeLorean Motor Company", and never claimed ownership of the intellectual property they did not buy or create. None of them collected royalties from Universal Studios, Nike, Target, Microsoft, etc. They for sure did not sell the name to a new company for the purpose of making a new car! The comparison is (at best) grasping at straws.

Spec 1,2,3 or even Stage 1,2,3 etc. have been around a very long time, and used by many automotive performance shops. Or, are you claiming DMCH invented that terminology now? Maybe they should have registered it with the USPTO. If anything, Bengston using "Spec" vs "Stage" results in DIFFERENTIATING his products from DMCH. He could have just as easily used the same terminology, but that would have been confusing.

I totally agree with what Matt said above, and I'll remind you that he is an IP attorney. What is your qualification again?

Sorry, I don't know who Matt is.

[DMC-81]

all of your experience? We talking months, maybe years? because I measure my time in decades. If you think "no one is confused" you are either lying or don't read any of the articles of the past 20 years outside of the community.

Marc, it is years in the community and decades as a car guy. I suspect I'm older than you think. So, I repeat, NO ONE is confused. As a car owner, car show attendee and entrant, member and now leader of the Florida club, I have talked to thousands of casual onlookers, enthusiasts, car owners, and Club members. No one asks if DMC is the original company. In fact, the vast majority of people know the original company failed long ago. That fact is ingrained in the story of the car. Even if someone is not sure, one doesn't require decades of experience to quickly ask / search to figure out the difference in the old and new DMC company. You said above "before 1995" referencing the start of the new DMC company. Guess what, that was 27 years ago. That is near the age of the new generation of owners (most of who don't even use this forum). I think your tenue in the community has colored your perception of reality. If the internet famous Florida Man gets it, maybe you should let this mantra go.

Sorry, I don't know who Matt is.

Maybe you should learn who you are debating IP law with.

[Malevy]

Marc, it is years in the community and decades as a car guy. I suspect I'm older than you think. So, I repeat, NO ONE is confused. As a car owner, car show attendee and entrant, member and now leader of the Florida club, I have talked to thousands of casual onlookers, enthusiasts, car owners, and Club members. No one asks if DMC is the original company. In fact, the vast majority of people know the original company failed long ago. That fact is ingrained in the story of the car. Even if someone is not sure, one doesn't require decades of experience to quickly ask / search to figure out the difference in the old and new DMC company. You said above "before 1995" referencing the start of the new DMC company. Guess what, that was 27 years ago. That is near the age of the new generation of owners (most of who don't even use this forum). I think your tenue in the community has colored your perception of reality. If the internet famous Florida Man gets it, maybe you should let this mantra go.

Maybe you should learn who you are debating IP law with.

You are entitled to your inaccurate opinion.

I have not been debating IP law with anyone, so I don't know WTF you are talking about.

If Matt is "Drive Stainless", then his disagreement with me is the same as yours. Clearly he also thinks there is no confusion.

Go read the articles, watch the videos, etc. Even most of the stuff WRT the Alpha 5 is being written as "DeLorean is Back", along with other headlines implying they are the same company.

How many more times should we repeat ourselves?

[gullwingD]

Plenty of people are confused. I've been hearing the confusion for 27 years. The countless TV news stories repeating wrong facts like they (DMCTX) purchased the rights to the name, which they never did. And from regular people who don't follow DeLoreans every day, they think it's the same company. All you need to know is they took Universal Pictures royalties from the estate of John DeLorean while his body was still warm, way before any settlement with fraudulent Sally Baldwin, who entered into a settlement in which she never had the rights to do. All you need to know is John DeLorean despised them. All true. It's an issue of morality.

Marc, it is years in the community and decades as a car guy. I suspect I'm older than you think. So, I repeat, NO ONE is confused. As a car owner, car show attendee and entrant, member and now leader of the Florida club, I have talked to thousands of casual onlookers, enthusiasts, car owners, and Club members. No one asks if DMC is the original company. In fact, the vast majority of people know the original company failed long ago. That fact is ingrained in the story of the car. Even if someone is not sure, one doesn't require decades of experience to quickly ask / search to figure out the difference in the old and new DMC company. You said above "before 1995" referencing the start of the new DMC company. Guess what, that was 27 years ago. That is near the age of the new generation of owners (most of who don't even use this forum). I think your tenue in the community has colored your perception of reality. If the internet famous Florida Man gets it, maybe you should let this mantra go.



Maybe you should learn who you are debating IP law with.

[AugustneverEnds]

In my experience all DeLorean owners know that DMCH is NOT the DeLorean Motor Company that built and marketed their car in 1981-2. The general public however much more of a mixed bag. How many of us have heard a version of "Oh DeLorean is in Texas now making new cars!" Like I said actual DMC-12 owners and DeLorean aficionados know this is inaccurate but it's less obvious to casual observers. Does it matter? To me, no, not really, you get used to hearing it and correcting people. Of course, my livelihood and identity are not intertwined with that misconception.

[DMC-81]

You are entitled to your inaccurate opinion.

I have not been debating IP law with anyone, so I don't know WTF you are talking about.

If Matt is "Drive Stainless", then his disagreement with me is the same as yours. Clearly he also thinks there is no confusion.

Go read the articles, watch the videos, etc. Even most of the stuff WRT the Alpha 5 is being written as "DeLorean is Back", along with other headlines implying they are the same company.

How many more times should we repeat ourselves?

Marc, you can't claim ignorance on the things that you wrote in this thread. Of course you were debating IP law, go back and review it.

Look, I think you and GullwingD are wrapped around the axle on these topics. You all have your opinion. I have mine, based on my experience. I don't know what the vibe is where you live, but I stand by my assessment on what it is like here. I really don't care what you all think and I'm not trying to change your opinion.

Here's a thought: perhaps you are perpetuating this ridiculous claim in your circle. Perhaps Joe Q public was confused years and years ago, but they are not confused anymore.

If you are so bothered by all this, (and it seems like you have been holding a grudge for many years), why don't you sell your cars and move on?

I know this: I am grateful to have a multi- location dedicated sales, parts, and service company, run by great people, supporting my 40+ year old classic car. A company that also has the lions share of the documents and tools from the shuttered factory.

Again: You do you, and good luck with that.

[Malevy]

Marc, you can't claim ignorance on the things that you wrote in this thread. Of course you were debating IP law, go back and review it.

Great debate tactic, make it look like I said something I never said. So much more common since 2016.

Look, I think you and GullwingD are wrapped around the axle on these topics. You all have your opinion. I have mine, based on my experience. I don't know what the vibe is where you live, but I stand by my assessment on what it is like here. I really don't care what you all think and I'm not trying to change your opinion.

Yet, you continue to argue. I'll keep going (as time permits), it only helps my SEO! Plus I found a few reporters plagiarizing my blog (ironic).

Here's a thought: perhaps you are perpetuating this ridiculous claim in your circle. Perhaps Joe Q public was confused years and years ago, but they are not confused anymore.

Incorrect. Even articles this weekend continue to make statements that make no differentiation.

If you are so bothered by all this, (and it seems like you have been holding a grudge for many years), why don't you sell your cars and move on?

Are you making an offer? Bring cash.

I know this: I am grateful to have a multi- location dedicated sales, parts, and service company, run by great people, supporting my 40+ year old classic car. A company that also has the lions share of the documents and tools from the shuttered factory.

Which has nothing to do with them choosing to take the name of a defunct company, along with claiming ownership of their trademarks.

The fact that DMCH registered the artwork created by JZD's company is all the proof you need that it was their INTENT to cause confusion. Of course, DMCH just settled instead of going to court where they would have likely lost.

Quit being a lemming fan boy, Tony will still fix your car. Or, are you on their payroll now? It would make sense, since someone has to counter the "bad advice from people online" . Makes me feel a bit better that my words are having an impact, thanks for that!

Again: You do you, and good luck with that.

As I have my entire life.. and since 1993 in the DeLorean community.

[BladeBronson]

Please start a new thread where you sue each other.

[DMC-81]

Great debate tactic, make it look like I said something I never said. So much more common since 2016.

Thank you, and that's exactly what you did ( i.e. claiming you didn't debate IP law with anyone (post #63), which you did in post #59 with Matt). That sure did look like a debate. By the way, what happened in 2016? I'm not following.

Incorrect. Even articles this weekend continue to make statements that make no differentiation.

Marc, please include a link to even one of the articles last weekend that states or even suggests that the new DMC is the same company as the original one that famously failed in 1982.

Here are the first three for the Alpha 5 that popped up in my search. No confusion, no false connection to the original company. But all three make it clear there is a difference:

"The DeLorean company failed before the blockbuster, three-movie "Back to the Future" franchise first began in 1985."
From:
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/434397

"The current DeLorean brand has three concepts now, including two that made debuts during Monterey Car Week."
From: https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news...ng/ar-AA10TbI3

"We started with the DMC-24 from 1982," Porta explained, referencing a series of sketches created by ItalDesign as a possible second car for the DeLorean brand if it had continued. In fact, ItalDesign created an entire lineage of "what if" cars that imagine what DeLoreans after the DMC-12 would have looked like if the company would have survived.
From: https://www.autoblog.com/2022/08/20/...erey-car-week/


Here's the first one from the search for DeLorean Motor Company:

"Surely it should at least somewhat resemble the DMC-12 that starred in the movies, but the car company went bankrupt before the first film even debuted."
From: https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/enth...hy/ar-AA11f9KI

These are just a few articles that popped up. I could continue, but I think you get the picture.

Quit being a lemming fan boy,

Sticks and stones Marc, and as you said:

Why are you making this personal anyway?.

[Malevy]

I am not posting links to help their SEO- but I just checked again, and there are many (even a majority) of google results with headlines like "DeLorean is back". Very few articles go in to the detail about how the current company has no connection what so ever to the original.

The average person on the street has no idea the history behind all of this. This can be easily tested, but I don't think you are all that interested in the reality of the matter.

All of the actions taken over the past 20 years, and even more so this year, are designed to capitalize on the "confusion". Hopefully one day a judge will decide on it. The legal documents available from the past 20+ years make the case, I don't think one shred of new evidence or testimony will be needed. DELOREAN IS SOMEONES NAME, and the fact that it is being used (especially on a car!) is an implied endorsement.