First, the video:
The car in question was really a cool idea. It was a 2015 Mustang GT (S550) that the B is for Build guys put a 1967 Mustang fastback body on, keeping all most all of the 2015 stuff funtional. It looked great. They further started customizing it by buying an aftermarket body kit to make it look like Eleanor from the Gone in 60 Second movie remake.
Apparently some months into the project, after literally millions of views, the owners of the Eleanor trademark took down all of the videos and literally took possession of the car.
wheelsmithy (Joe-with-an-L) (Forum Supporter) said:
So that's what happened.
Lame in 60 seconds.
Ironic that a movie about stealing cars steals a car.
must be MUCH more to this story......
huh?? Faked-up drama to drum up views?
First of all. This dude is not even close to the first dude to make an early Mustang look like that goofy car from the movie. Secondly, can they actually do that?
ShawnG
UltimaDork
6/1/20 6:32 p.m.
All those hairdressers must be furious.
NOHOME
MegaDork
6/1/20 6:35 p.m.
So does that mean that the trademark holder can confiscate any of the cars on the street sporting a Mustangs to Fear fiberglass kit?
I trust they poured a pound of sand down the oil fill tube and carb before they loaded the car on the delivery vehicle.
Well, now I really want to build an exact replica of that car but call it "Eloise" and paint it purple. That should be all I need to evade their trademark nonsense.
here is the WiKi for the original movie
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gone_in_60_Seconds_(1974_film)
its an interesting story as Director H. B. "Toby" Halick owned a junkyard over in Gardena and did the complete movie on $150,000 ,
The movie was filmed on the streets around Gardena to Long Beach , they crashed a lot of cars !
The fun was trying to figure out which street they were on when you were a local :)
Anyway I wonder who owns the trademark since Toby died years ago ,
slowbird said:
Well, now I really want to build an exact replica of that car but call it "Eloise" and paint it purple. That should be all I need to evade their trademark nonsense.
You're not building one for commercial purposes though. Which is where I suspect he berkeleyed up and got himself in trouble.
The trademark holder of that particular movie car is notoriously litigious.
In reply to californiamilleghia :
Here ya go. (SPOILER: Denice Halicki, his widow)
Carrying on. I'd guess what happened was that Chris was told to surrender the car or pay a huge licensing fee to continue using the trademark.
He likely surrendered the car and deleted the videos, whose content regularly referred to the Mustang by the Eleanor trademark, to make the issue go away.
nimblemotorsports said:
huh?? Faked-up drama to drum up views?
Nope, not even slightly. B is for Build doesn't do stuff like that. The guy that runs it started out out of hating all the fake drama in car build shows.
Javelin (Forum Supporter) said:
First, the video:
The car in question was really a cool idea. It was a 2015 Mustang GT (S550) that the B is for Build guys put a 1967 Mustang fastback body on, keeping all most all of the 2015 stuff funtional. It looked great. They further started customizing it by buying an aftermarket body kit to make it look like Eleanor from the Gone in 60 Second movie remake.
Apparently some months into the project, after literally millions of views, the owners of the Eleanor trademark took down all of the videos and literally took possession of the car.
That's stupid. Plus, everyone knows that Eleanor was a yellow '73.
I liked Denise for taking the screws to Shelby. I hope this E36 M3ty idea wasn't hers.
In reply to buzzboy :
It's common in trademark and intellectual property disputes to take that kind of legal action.
Failure to take action, after its been brought to your attention, can be interpreted as abandonment and used as a weapon against the trademark in future cases. Sucks, but that's how the game works.
Now I'm sure that the trademark could have been licensed for some undisclosed percentage of the money gained from the monetized videos. With an NDA, a disclaimer, and an agreement not to resell the car.
I don't know what all the details surrounding the situation are, nor are we likely to ever, as I assume there's an NDA in place.
The0retical (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to buzzboy :
It's common in trademark and intellectual property disputes to take that kind of legal action.
Failure to take action, after its been brought to your attention, can be interpreted as abandonment and used as a weapon against the trademark in future cases. Sucks, but that's how the game works.
This. If they don't defend it, it's gone.
The trademark holder isn't the one that did the stealing.
This is no different than me starting a vlog called B is for Build or a magazine called Grassroots Motorsports.
In reply to Toyman01 (Forum Supporter) :
Except that Eleanor is a fake Shelby GT-500, which in and if itself is based on a Ford Mustang. So who really owns the rights to the design of that car? Ford? Shelby? Halicki? Not to mention it's a commercially available kit from a reputable manufacturer. It's not like it's a copy of the design, they just bought it from a catalog.
So why pull the videos and take the car? Why not contact them and create a marketing opportunity to work together, like Lykan is doing with Casey Putsch's Hypersport?
In reply to Javelin (Forum Supporter) :
It doesn't matter what it is. It matters that it is a trademarked item and name and he was using their design, item, and or fame to make money.
At a guess, they did contact him and he didn't agree to their price. Then it comes down to a cease and desist order. The car and the videos have to go away at that point.
Yeah I think your sensationalizing something that should be educational. His car was not stolen. The owner of the TM/Copyright of Elenore is under no obligation to offer a reasonable deal to someone who attempts to profit on an unlicensed clone of their intellectual property knowingly or not. B is for Build was definitely engaged in using their IP as a profit center. It is unfortunate that BIFB is out the effort. Based on the cost of currently available licensed clones I'm assuming the fee requested was to substantial. They also may have not given that option and simply demanded that the IP be returned.
In an case B is for Build is going to make out great on this because I am sure many forums are currently discussing the same take that the car was "Stolen" from BIFB. It wasn't Stolen and shouldn't be presented as such. This should be used as a cautionary and educational moment for anyone engaging in copying existing media (yes cars can be media, art, etc). Sometimes you can get by as an individual under fair use however if you are profiting at all don't do it without written permission of your license from the TM/Copyright holder. I'm not sure you won't run into issues with a homebuilt "Elenore" when you go to sell it.
Ok how did he not just start calling it ELVIS or ELAINE in bad overdubs before they physically took it? I can see the vids issue, but the physical car in the possession of the creator? If my kids create a really poor Mona Lisa copy, can the Louvre take it?
So was the issue that BIFB called the car an "Eleanor"? Or that they were building this on a commercialized venue, no matter what they called it? So it's ok for one of us to build one ourselves since we're not monetizing the build? As pointed out, these kits exist and BIFB just bought one that any of us could buy.
It's too bad, I was watching that build and was really interested in it, it was turning out really well! I'm surprised that they had to relinquish the car as well, after all, it's their property. I can see having to take down the videos, or going back and having to edit out all "eleanor" references...
The sad part is that the remake Eleanor is not an attractive car. It's like some 90's tuner got their hands on a classic Mustang and decided to update it. And the movie wasn't really very good, with bad CGI in the big jump. The original is a terrible movie from a lot of viewpoints but the chase and jump are legit. I guess maybe if you were the right age when it came out you'd have imprinted on the 2000 Eleanor, but the original is a more iconic car. Unfortunately, you can't make money with replicas because it's just an orange Mustang :)
As for "you can buy kits from a reputable manufacturer" - are you sure? I think Fusion/Classic Restorations has been protecting their IP fairly strongly so they can do this: https://www.fusionmotorco.com/eleanor-build-sheet
In reply to docwyte :
The issue is likely that the BIFB channel is monetized, meaning the owner makes money from the advertising that takes place during each view that is received.
The project started with him touting that he was going to build an Eleanor Mustang and it was repeatedly referred to as such.
Since that particular style of Mustang is trademarked, and could be licensed to builders to be built as such, the channel ran afoul of the intellectual property regulations.
The IP holder could have offered him a deal to overdub and change the video names, however once the injunction is issued that's usually not something you can just do without the approval of the aggrieved party. The IP holder, or the lawyers, may not have felt so generous and made it impossible for the project to continue by demanding terms BIFB either couldn't meet or it didn't make sense for them to meet.
