User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 5:13:47 PM EDT
[#1]
It appears that Bushy could have had Colt's claim reguarding the terms AR15, Commando, and such thrown out, but chose not to as they wish for their product to be differentiated from Colt's. This is probably why the court did not go into detail about other terms, aside from M4.
Thus far, it appears that using the term Colt AR15 is a direct violation, as it identifies the manufacturer under legal questioning to be the source for Colt AR15's, but the term AR15, and the design itself are not protected under Colt's rights. The terms in question aside from M4, seems to have been rejected by the court as they never state a clear resolution to such matters. After reading that, it appears Colt was using the design of AR15 rifles in function and appearance as ammunition in their case against Bushmaster as well. Had they won, I think it would have been bad. It appears this case heavily affected the whole AR15 market alot more than what was thought. I expect to see future legal action by Colt as they didn't seem to prepared for this issue. Very interesting read even though it is edited for confidentiality. I hope to see further documents reguarding the uses of these names, and Bushmaster's position on such labelings. Personally, it looks like Colt was unprepared and Bushy's lawyer was very persistent. Colt never made a clear defense to their products name, aside from the use of the actual Colt name, and/or any markings related to Colt's direct company recognition. It appears that AR15, Match Target, M16, Commando, and CAR are open for debate, but not in Colt's favor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 5:14:10 PM EDT
[#2]
I have a couple very nice Colts, they are no better than any of the other brands I own in fit or function. These were purchased before I knew what kind of company Colt was. I will keep them but probably won't be buying anymore of their products unless they change their ways.
Good for BM, all that label stuff was BS anyway  ...LL
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 5:42:39 PM EDT
[#3]
So does this open up the gates for other companies to start roll-marking their rifles "AR15" or "M4" or is that still up in the air?
WIZZO |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 5:51:30 PM EDT
[#4]
Colt's lost their M4 trademark, so yes, anyone can use it how ever they wish. Barring a successful appeal of course.
Colt's AR-15 trade mark stands. So they still have the TM, not sure what that means though, but if it means anyone can stamp AR-15 on their rifle, then I have no idea what a TM is. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 5:53:38 PM EDT
[#5]
Makes sense on the M4 designation. I kinda understand about the AR-15 TM, though. Thanks WIZZO |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 5:55:48 PM EDT
[#6]
After reading the opinion, I'd have to say the answer is no and yes. M4 is fair game for anyone. AR-15 is still Colt's, for the time being. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 5:59:34 PM EDT
[#7]
Fuck me, check this quote from the decision:
"The licensed firearms dealers from whom commercial purchasers buy their firearms are very knowledgeable about the products they sell" Holy shit, that's a doozy. G |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 6:10:16 PM EDT
[#8]
Big +1 on this comment. Bushmaster's victory is a very good thing. It keeps the competition alive between the two companies, and others for that matter. It gives the consumer greater freedoms / choices for what suits them best, and better control of the market.(i.e. Price) This way the consumer wins in the end, and can enjoy the benefits of innovation. 4X4SC |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 6:18:35 PM EDT
[#9]
Yea, sounds like something Harley Gayvidson would do.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 6:18:52 PM EDT
[#10]
I'd say that "for the time being" is a pretty good description of it... I'd guess that the precedence of them losing the M4 trademark status puts the AR15 in danger as well. And I kind of suspect that the only reason they didn't lose it in this case is that Bushmaster hadn't been directly using it. I would bet that if (and it seems likely to happen sooner or later now), some other mfr starts roll marking with AR15, and Colt sues (can't imagine them taking the risk again after this though) that they will lose that action on the same grounds. About the only thing I can think of why Colt went through with this suit in the first place is that they believed that Bushmaster would flinch first... But of course, IANAL. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 6:21:00 PM EDT
[#11]
i wonder why they sued over M4 & not over 1911?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 6:24:29 PM EDT
[#12]
The opinion is long and complex and heavily redacted (although probably not in the legally relevant parts, it makes it tougher to read). As I read it, Colt lost the M4 trademark because it was a generic term and because Bushmaster filed a counterclaim seeking cancellation of Colt's M4 trademark. I don't see anything in the court's opiinion indicating that Bushmaster tried to get any other marks cancelled. With respect to the AR-15 mark, the court ruled that there wasn't a triable issue on trademark infringement because there was no likelihood of confusion. In other words, Bushmaster's use of the tern "AR-15" in its catalog wasn't going to fool anyone into thinking a Bushmaster is a Colt. Nevertheless, the court allowed Colt's false advertising claim based on Bushmaster's use of the AR-15 and other marks to go to the jury. It's not entirely clear from the opinion (or at least muy cursory reading of it) why the false advertising claims survived but not the trademark infringement. It could just be a matter of the specific bases raised in Bushmaster's summary judgment motion. I suspect that if someone challanged Colt's "AR-15" mark on the same basis that Bushmaster challanged the "M4" mark, Colt would have a hard time holding on to it. I think "AR-15" has become at least as generic as "M4." |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 6:53:49 PM EDT
[#13]
We need a picture of a snake eating a horse.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 6:55:12 PM EDT
[#14]
Wow they got dicked on that one!
Thats scary! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 6:59:52 PM EDT
[#15]
Is it a "real" M4 now?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 7:09:22 PM EDT
[#16]
I'd have to say yes! 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 7:19:07 PM EDT
[#17]
Has Colt ever tried to come after this site for using AR15 as a URL?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 7:52:21 PM EDT
[#18]
here is how i look at it.if it is my gun this is how i call them dont give a rats ass what colt or any other company has to say about it.
16inch carbine-M4 20inch rifle- M16 but with out f/a thats what a 20inch rifle has always been called got a differrent name show me. 24in rifle-Varmint Slayer
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 8:15:17 PM EDT
[#19]
WOW...the value of anything with "M4" on it, just got pissed away. (ouch)
Now, even Olympic will say M4. (ouch again) Oh well...gotta love them semantics!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 8:47:24 PM EDT
[#20]
Outstanding, finally some numbers to go with the conjecture. Thanks for the link Forest. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 8:51:09 PM EDT
[#21]
It's official, Bushmaster had a goverment contract!!! So bushmaster does in fact make mil spec quality weapons without the use of the much talked about Colt TDP
When will the kool aid drinkers gather for mass suicide? How will they go on with life knowing this  Some people take this stuff way too seriously. Like it really matters to any consumer what Bushmaster or Colt call their products |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 9:03:16 PM EDT
[#22]
Coke & Pepsi are just colored sugar-water...that's all. The concept that one tastes "better" than another is programming. People get VERY emotional about branding. And I'm very glad they do, because branding puts groceries in my icebox. (and pays for all my wonderful toys) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 9:05:05 PM EDT
[#23]
". . . Commercial purchasers are generally sophisticated and knowledgeable about the products they buy. Defendant’s SMF ¶ 36; Eliason Decl. ¶ 8. They often have an interest in firearms generally, and they conduct research before purchasing a weapon. Id. They also typically are very familiar with the firearms they own and know the differences between the various firearms manufacturers and their products. Id.47 Many of the civilian customers who purchase AR-15/M16-type rifles and M4-type carbines are also familiar with the web site www.ar15.com, an extremely popular online resource for firearms enthusiasts. Defendant’s SMF ¶ 37; Karwan Report at 5.48 The licensed firearms dealers from whom commercial purchasers buy firearms are very knowledgeable about the products they sell, and they sometimes guide customers toward products that best suit the purchaser’s needs. Defendant’s SMF ¶ 38; Plaintiff’s Opposing SMF ¶ 38.49 Firearms dealers sometimes give their opinions to customers about what the customer should consider when purchasing AR-15-, M16- or M4-type firearms, such as price, quality, reliability, accuracy, features and the availability of after-market accessories. Id. ¶ 39.50" |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 9:33:28 PM EDT
[#24]
Hardly. 16 inch guns have been around almost as long as the AR15 itself. What makes the M4 unique are the barrel weighted forward of the handguard, with the M203 cut, and the feed ramps. Others might argue the double lined handguard, as well as some more minor differences. 'Commando' or CAR-15 would be more appropriate if your weapon lacks those unique features. You might as well call a 20 inch A2 an M4 if you are going to ignore the differences. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 9:33:48 PM EDT
[#25]
I wouldnt. Bushmaster still wants to differentiate themselves from Colt. And they would have to retool everything. Just because a company can doesnt mean they will. I think Bushmaster has a good enough reputation that they dont need their products to be associated with Colts to do well. Now for these dime a dozen AR makers out there right now, they will be all over this. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 9:39:22 PM EDT
[#26]
You can bet that other players are smelling the blood in the water. A ruking is a ruling (Bushmaster may do nothing) |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 9:41:20 PM EDT
[#27]
Sounds like the final nail in Colt's coffin--------I'm thinking they were counting on a big payout from Bushy just to keep themselves afloat.
Colt used to be a good brand----now they're just worthless scum who try to shaft a potential customer with inflated prices--poor CS- if any---lack of innovation---and using lawsuits to kill off the competition---instead of building a better mouse trap and listening to customer's wants and needs. Not to mention playing games like large pins---sear blocks ect......to screw their customers around---and stick their brown noses up their PC buddies asses. GOOD RIDDENCE |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 9:43:45 PM EDT
[#28]
No it doesnt. Colt defense makes its money from governments, not civilians. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 9:48:16 PM EDT
[#29]
Bushmaster could just mark it XM4E2S.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 10:26:41 PM EDT
[#30]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 10:59:35 PM EDT
[#31]
Here you go here is comparrison of Colt Vs. Bushmaster Colt vs. Bushmast comparrison link |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2005 11:17:09 PM EDT
[#32]
Not really interested. The only comparisons that matter are the ones that involve, dirt, filth, 30,000 rounds, lack of cleaning, sub zero temps, 100 degree days, and a man sized target at 100 yards. As long as a gun is durable, reliable and accurate, I dont care who makes it, or how they got the gun to work. The Brand on the side means nothing to me, and I really dont care if its called an M4 or MDildo, all that matters is that it goes bang when I need it to |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 12:10:54 AM EDT
[#33]
BFI had the TDP as the time they made those M4s, they had to return it and promise to not profit from the knowledge gained by its possession under the terms of the previous lawsuit. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 12:17:53 AM EDT
[#34]
By brothers wifes aunts uncles mothers second cousins sons best frind from high schools little sisters step-father told me the same thing. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 2:51:41 AM EDT
[#35]
Granted I am a card-carrying Colt Club member, but this is Bullshit
How the F**k could someone not see the obvious here? all the knock-off companies have cloned the M4 in name and look Have called their gear M4, AR15, and other US Court approved trademark terms and have ridden Colts innovation and popularity to bootleg inferior clones I suppose it is much like Kleenex, Xerox, and other pervasive terms in American life today They become SO popular, they are seen as public domain still Sux |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 3:35:48 AM EDT
[#36]
Yeah...and it really sucked for IBM to lose all those lawsuits against clone manufacturers and look where it got us!!!!! IBM=out of the PC business. Clone makers= reliable and affordable PC's. Those that don't heed history are destined to repeat it. You can spend your money INNOVATING your way to success, or trying to LITIGATE your way to success. Maybe Colt would do better using it's funds for R&D and building a successful civilian marketing program. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 4:13:38 AM EDT
[#37]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 4:46:41 AM EDT
[#38]
Obviously you dont understand law. The reason the claims were dismissed are very logical. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 5:08:14 AM EDT
[#39]
It must be true if your un-named annomous source says so.....time to throw away my Bushmaster AR. Although, I won the Expert Class with it in the Nataion Matches at Camp Perry this year! Yea, it must suck! How many Colt's finished in the top 10?...........0! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 5:55:16 AM EDT
[#40]
Hmmm.......... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 6:14:17 AM EDT
[#41]
From page 18 of the opinion: "Bushmaster does not consider Colt to be a viable competitor for commercial sales."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 6:47:58 AM EDT
[#42]
What evidence is there to back this up? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 6:58:30 AM EDT
[#43]
How are terms like AR15, M16, M4, etc not generic terms when they are terms that are applied to military weapons, which in most cases have been produced by multiple manufacturers?
FN makes bolt guns built on the Win M70. HS Precision makes rifles built on the Win M70 and Rem M700. Lots of other companies use those actions in their rifles as well. It's still pretty much an M70 or M700. With all the copying of designs, I don't see what the fucking deal is if the original companies name isn't used in the model designator. (Colt's not the original anyway, they bought the AR.) Volquartsen 10/22s are still 10/22s, BM ARs are still AR15s, and Ed Brown 1911s are still 1911s. That's how I see it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 7:12:25 AM EDT
[#44]
LMFAO
 Doesn't the gun industry have enough trouble? Seems to me that suing each other is counter-productive. Good for Bushmaster. Colt, stop suing, be nice to your civilan customers and your buisness might pick up. My .02 I've carried a Colt M-4 and Colt SMGs as duty weapons. In the Marines, for 5 years I carried a Colt M-16A2. At home I have 8 Bushmasters, an RRA, and when I get home will pick up 2 DPMS lowers. All you haters on either side are wasting your breath. Colt and Bushy are quality weapons. When placed side buy side to tell the difference you have to look at the markings. My ONLY issue with Colt is the silly shit they impose on civilians. I'm a LEO so I can get the "real deal" but I find it assinine that they do the different size pins, sear blocks etc. I just don't understand why they cut their nose off to spite the face. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 7:28:46 AM EDT
[#45]
Colt doesnt want ANY civilian market, thus the lawsuit to put BM out of biz. Screw colt |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 7:29:42 AM EDT
[#46]
The 700 action was designed so long ago the tradewark has probably expired by now. Different scenario. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 7:31:24 AM EDT
[#47]
This reminds me of the factory closing and mass layoffs of Detroit, one stock analyist made the point that they will never recover by closing production, layoffs and heavy (HEAVY) sales gimicks, but they will have to make a product that the American public wants at the price they ask. Now, the rest of the story, does Colt even stamp a rifle "AR-15" at all. If not how can they stand the kleenex test? Bill p.s. I am sure some knuklehead will try to mark something a "M4-Carbean" 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 7:34:55 AM EDT
[#48]
Geez that is Scary! Photoshop or did Hesse actually make them like that? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 7:37:20 AM EDT
[#49]
And reading the opinion thats why Bushmaster won. Think of it this way. When you look through the picture thread thats tacked up top and you see a rifle with a flattop upper, collapseable stock, and short barrel, does anyone automatically think "oh thats a Colt M4." No. Therefore a manufacturer building a rifle that looks like an M4 is not an infringement on Colts trademark. It sounds like Colts lawsuit was for features that make a rifle look like an M4 and not necessarily the name M4. However Bushmaster turned the tables on Colt and was able to get Colts trademark on the M4 named rescinded, which cracks me up. Second, Bushmaster was able to demonstrate that their product stands alone. When someone sees a Bushmaster rifle and the markings on it the person knows its a Bushmaster. Bushmaster is large enough and has a good enough reputation that they do not need to copy Colt to get their product sold. It sells itself now. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2005 7:39:22 AM EDT
[#50]
Yeah, you want me to tell you all about one of the guys that guards nukes.  Camp Perry is the perfect use for a non-Colt AR. Since reliability is optional when wearing yellow glasses. Quien, I wouldn't get the DPMS if I were you. Or at least drop in a Colt bolt and carrier. Every time I shot that thiing I ended up having to spend 10 minutes clearing the most god-awful malfunctions. It kinda looked like a monkey fucking a football. |
||
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
