I don't know all the details, but it happened at the time Chrysler was cracking down on all the car clubs and businesses that had the word "Mopar" in their name. The lawyers sent out cease and desist notices to hundreds of individuals they believed to be in violation of copyright laws. They even ordered an old guy who owned a mom and pop tavern in Wyoming to remove the word "Jeep's" from the name of his business. It didn't make any difference that his nickname had been "Jeep" since WWII and he was in no way associated with the vehicle. The lawyers were brutal and blind to common sense, so some businesses just quit operating, as did some clubs.

The magazine had a different name at the time, but I forget what it was called..but I think it was "MoPerformance". The publisher decided to fight and editorialized in the magazine about the overzealous actions concerning copyright infringement. Since he bad-mouthed Chrysler in print, they sued and he lost in court.

He changed the name of the magazine and backed off the criticism, but apparently the financial hit was too much and he went out of business. A bunch of subscribers, including me, were left with no magazine and no refund.

It was arguably the best Chrysler enthusiast magazine on the market at the time, but the lesson was pretty clear; you don't go up against deep pockets and squadrons of lawyers unless you have deep pockets yourself.

Chrysler finally woke up to the stupidity and tried to make peace with everyone, but many enthusiasts told them to shove it where the sun didn't shine and I know people who sold their Mopars and haven't owned a Chrysler product since...new or old.

My god, they are a bunch of #@$% and *^@#. Why on earth did they do that in the first place, especially since the old Mopar guys are the ones that are most dedicated and would fight for Mopar.

They have'nt changed much since then. I've heard that they are in a spat with Mopar Muscle over the new Fifth Avenue, I mean Charger.

_________________
82 D150-225/727
02 Dakota-3.9/5 speed
87 GMC C7000-8.2 Detroit Diesel/5+2

Its called tradmark protection. If they don't protect the tradmark, they could have problems when they try to enforce their trademark against violators. When it is lawyers at 10 paces anything goes, and sometimes the little guy gets stepped on.

It wasn't what they did, it was the way that they did it. Our car club got one of their letters and it was not written as you would to a bunch of folks who are buying, advertising and promoting your product and keeping your name in front of the public.

It was one thing to move against parts suppliers and manufacturers who are using your copyrighted names, but to jump the car clubs and a tavern owner was idiotic.

As to the "whys", I'd like to take the opportunity to point out what seems obvious to me but a lot a Moparphiles either don't understand or don't accept. Daimler Chrysler has almost no interest in the "old" Mopar hobby, or any of it's devotees. I'm not going to argue whether they should or shouldn't, but the fact is, as a corporation, they don't care. They are only worried about selling new cars, which is only logical.

At their respective displays at SEMA and Barret Jackson, Daimler pointedly refused to allow Plymouths in the display, since Plymouth no longer exists. They were afraid it could tarnish the image they're trying to project, and it probably would have.

So for all of the Mopurists who have such a deep, abiding adoration of the Charger name and still cringe at the thought of the Charger badge on a four door, just get over it — you're simply not the target buyer for the car, and your objections will not put the slightest dent in Charger sales. I anticipate the car will be a sales success for Dodge.

I'm not saying this to offend anybody, and I'm not saying that this is the way things SHOULD be. But in MY case at least, Daimler is correct: I won't be able to afford a new full-size Dodge or Chrysler anytime soon, no matter what badge is on it. Heck, I couldn't even afford a mid-80's FWD Charger. Daimler Chrysler/Dodge is in the business to make money, not revere the past. They're not the same company that built the cars we love — that company has been gone for years (decades?). Why can't everyone just accept that Daimler doesn't profit from warm, fuzzy emotions. Business is business. If you want an old-style '69 Charger, then find one and buy one. If you want a modern equivalent, then start your own company and build one. See how long you're in business — but your customer base is a dying breed.

Sorry if I seem harsh, but I've been reading the whining regarding the new Charger on the forums and Mopar mags for months now, and I just had to vent. I love all the gang here at .org, and respect everyone's opinions (even if they're wrong ) For the record, I LIKE the new Charger for what it is, not the badge (although the Charger concept from '99 was WAYYY better looking). Think there would be such a huge uproar if they'd called it a Dart?

VM[/i]

[quote="vynn3"]As to the "whys", I'd like to take the opportunity to point out what seems obvious to me but a lot a Moparphiles either don't understand or don't accept. Daimler Chrysler has almost no interest in the "old" Mopar hobby, or any of it's devotees. I'm not going to argue whether they should or shouldn't, but the fact is, as a corporation, they don't care. They are only worried about selling new cars, which is only logical.

At their respective displays at SEMA and Barret Jackson, Daimler pointedly refused to allow Plymouths in the display, since Plymouth no longer exists. They were afraid it could tarnish the image they're trying to project, and it probably would have.

So for all of the Mopurists who have such a deep, abiding adoration of the Charger name and still cringe at the thought of the Charger badge on a four door, just get over it — you're simply not the target buyer for the car, and your objections will not put the slightest dent in Charger sales. I anticipate the car will be a sales success for Dodge.

I'm not saying this to offend anybody, and I'm not saying that this is the way things SHOULD be. But in MY case at least, Daimler is correct: I won't be able to afford a new full-size Dodge or Chrysler anytime soon, no matter what badge is on it. Heck, I couldn't even afford a mid-80's FWD Charger. Daimler Chrysler/Dodge is in the business to make money, not revere the past. They're not the same company that built the cars we love — that company has been gone for years (decades?). Why can't everyone just accept that Daimler doesn't profit from warm, fuzzy emotions. Business is business. If you want an old-style '69 Charger, then find one and buy one. If you want a modern equivalent, then start your own company and build one. See how long you're in business — but your customer base is a dying breed.

Sorry if I seem harsh, but I've been reading the whining regarding the new Charger on the forums and Mopar mags for months now, and I just had to vent. I love all the gang here at .org, and respect everyone's opinions (even if they're wrong ) For the record, I LIKE the new Charger for what it is, not the badge (although the Charger concept from '99 was WAYYY better looking). Think there would be such a huge uproar if they'd called it a Dart?


Perhaps I missed something, but I didn't see any previous posts that commented on the new Charger, one way or the other. This thread is about magazines and the only reference was to a possible spitting contest going on between a magazine and DC because the editor didn't toe the mark and become an apologist and cheerleader for management decisions.

Chrysler's interest in car clubs and heritage swings with the winds of opportunity. We had a VP from Chrysler give a presentation at one of our club meetings and he said there was strong support for enthusiasts within the company. At the same time Chairman Lido was looking for a '48 T&C convertible to add to his collection and was contacting Chrysler clubs for leads. Then, a few months later, they hit everyone with the copyright hammer. Maybe he was mad because we couldn't find the car he wanted.

FWIW, your idea that the automotive past should be ignored in exchange for a few dollars today is a major reason Detroit is in trouble. Engineers should engineer, stylists should design, bean counters should count beans and leaders should be historians and visionaries.

Today, bureaucrats in the US government do the engineering, stylists create juvenile, unattractive designs that suggest they formerly worked for Mattel. Single focus bean counters, who know nothing about cars, make critical decisions based on inaccurate consumer data and meanwhile, the top managers sit around trying to figure out how to weasel another million or two into their contract.

As for "getting over" anything, that's my decision alone to make and needs no encouragement or chiding from anyone. There are people who haven't gotten over brewers putting sugar in beer, the war between the states, Britney Spears getting married, or the death of of 8-tracks and Beta, so I guess I can continue to grouse about cars and car companies.

My god, they are a bunch of #@$% and *^@#. Why on earth did they do that in the first place, especially since the old Mopar guys are the ones that are most dedicated and would fight for Mopar.

They have'nt changed much since then. I've heard that they are in a spat with Mopar Muscle over the new Fifth Avenue, I mean Charger.

Okay, now you know why I don't use the quote function...

VM

Dont forget Rodney Hargis March 2001 Mopar muscle.

_________________
1966 Dart GT
4 spd. OD conversion
8 3/4 - 3.55 SG (Sold)

62 Lancer GT
B Body 8 3/4

They actually did a good article on the Australian Hemi 6 in the latest issue.

That's because you could get a hot rod version of it from the factory.

I have seen the new Charger and Daytona in person at Vegas. It sucks even worse in person than it does in pictures.

_________________
Official Cookie and Mater Tormentor.

Daimler-Chrysler is just whoring out the Hemi name.

check out the in the mcg Mopar Collectors"s Guide magazine. it covers the slant six race in Vegas and North carlonia.