Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-15-2004, 03:51 PM
  #61  
Registered User
 
number77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,428
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by redzed
Considering that both Scion offering before the tC were just Japanese market 2-box "people carriers," Toyota didn't have to do much in response to all those surveys. The xB was little more that a Japanese homemarket bB (which stands for "Big Box" with upgraded bumpers for North America. I guess all those survey respondents had always wanted rebodied Echos that had previously been sold exclusively in Japan?

The VW reference is also "rich," considering that they currently are losing a grand or two on every unit sold in North America. Blame the strong Euro. Blame a product cycle that's just about to change over. Blame VW for overstocking Jettas and Passats - all in an attempt to force very European, slightly quirky products into the mainstream.

The issue here isn't GM's inability to "listen." The problem is that they don't want us to see what they've got in store. Perhaps they're gearing up to prevent the negative buzz from "something like the Aztek."
sorry about that, i was refering to the options. like the bigger sterio and whatnot.
i kinda feel bad for GM's situation, we all want a cheap Camaro but its hard for them to give it to us. If the minimum wage was raised it would help out a ton. prices of parts/labor(from unions) going up on their side of the picture, and we have been stuck with the same minimum wage for a few years.
Us with the same amount of money + them with less money = it being veryhard for any company to make something that the cheap folks will buy

edit:i can see red getting mad but no one else.
your a bunch of bandwagoners
if this pic got no attention from GM and was real everybody would say great job. i don't think there would be one post on the intire internet telling him he is stupid. but now that something happened a few are getting upset.

Last edited by number77; 11-15-2004 at 03:57 PM.
number77 is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 03:59 PM
  #62  
Banned
 
redzed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by Doug Harden
A few quotes by the MORON, Paul aka RC45 who screwed it up for ALL of us..

I personally want GM to fry this @$$hole....selfish bastard.....
Shouldn't you save some of that indignation for the "geniuses" at GM who've supposedly come up with idea of $70K Corvette? I could car less whether the "embargoed" images depict a Formula 1 racer with the engine of Top Fuel Dragster. The cycle of price escalation in the Corvette line is threatening to make the car inaccessible to "average" enthusiasts, and the latest incident just underlines how GM has become just as greedy and disconnected as the RIAA.

A C6 Coupe pushing $55K? A $70K Z06? It's no wonder that Red Planet doesn't want to talk any more.
redzed is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 04:02 PM
  #63  
Admin Emeritus
 
JasonD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Nashville, TN area
Posts: 11,157
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Redzed:

Are you entirely sure you know what you are talking about in the past few posts you have made in this thread?
JasonD is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 05:01 PM
  #64  
Registered User
 
Z28Wilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by redzed
Shouldn't you save some of that indignation for the "geniuses" at GM who've supposedly come up with idea of $70K Corvette?
Who in the hell said the Z06 will be $70,000??? Did I miss something? Did the pricing info leak along with the pictures?

I did jump to a conclusion that GM told RP to stay away, and if that is incorrect I apologize. If I was him, knowing everything that he knew and I read such mindless drivel from a lot of people here I probably would have left a loooong time ago. RP you must have the patience of a saint!
Z28Wilson is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 05:49 PM
  #65  
Prominent Member
 
Doug Harden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Exclamation Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by redzed
Shouldn't you save some of that indignation for the "geniuses" at GM who've supposedly come up with idea of $70K Corvette? I could car less whether the "embargoed" images depict a Formula 1 racer with the engine of Top Fuel Dragster. The cycle of price escalation in the Corvette line is threatening to make the car inaccessible to "average" enthusiasts, and the latest incident just underlines how GM has become just as greedy and disconnected as the RIAA.

A C6 Coupe pushing $55K? A $70K Z06? It's no wonder that Red Planet doesn't want to talk any more.
What the he!! are you talking about?!?

The C6 is absolutely the BEST BARGAIN on the planet. You can't buy that kind of performance for any where near that price.

Besides, isn't the C6 MSRP'd at nearly the same $$ as a C5?

For that matter, when was the Corvette EVER marketed to the "average enthusiast"??

The Corvette is Chevy's Halo car...both in performance and technology....and it can basically charge what the market will bear......and still sell them all.
Doug Harden is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 06:23 PM
  #66  
Registered User
 
number77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,428
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

as Jason hinted at. the C6 is cheaper than the C5 when you compare the base models. that 55k is fully loaded and with dealer markup.
number77 is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 06:59 PM
  #67  
Registered User
 
87camracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 329
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

ive not yet read the posts over on z06vette or much other info outside of this thread so please enlighten my errors.

im on both sides of the fence here. yes its legally and morally wrong as well as very unprofessional to leak information/pictures/documents given to you with the understanding that its for your eyes only. i can understand that, but please tell me where there is a copyright symbol on that z06 pic? please tell me how an average joe like me had ANY idea it just wasnt another fan boy photoshop of what they want the z06 to look like.

please tell me how the average person (excluding Paul [who may have known they were real GM pics]) would know that they were breaking any sort of law or anything like that. hell until all this happened i didnt put much faith in any of the info and kind of shrugged it off like i have done so many times for the F5.

its kind of like playing Poker. if you accidently drop a card, play it off like it means nothing to you that your opponent knows what card you have. there are way too many variables in the equations for someone to arrive at a definate answer short of one that starts with "i think".

i guess im not seeing the bigger picture here.
87camracer is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 07:09 PM
  #68  
Registered User
 
detltu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Madisonville, Louisiana
Posts: 658
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Just going to throw this out there:
GM has every right and the responsibility to find out who is leaking information and what not. That is part of their buisness and they have to protect these things and make sure that people who recieve priveleged info can be trusted.

On the other hand if GM is going around trying to bully their enthusiasts that speaks very poorly of them. If this stuff is true then they are alienating their fanbase. To me GM is allready on thin ice becasue of the whole Camaro thing. They have not driven me over to Ford yet but attacking people who really haven't done anything wrong could just do it.

David
detltu is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 07:26 PM
  #69  
Prominent Member
 
Doug Harden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

And that's the difference here.....GM is going after Paul and his source.

All GM has done otherwise is to tell websites to remove their copyrighted property.

GM isn't threatening the average Joe....just a self righteous thief and his source.
Doug Harden is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 08:02 PM
  #70  
Registered User
 
MunchE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 599
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Don't forget we've also got the guy who's "on our side" saying he's taking his ball and going home because we're so evil for reposting the links to this picture. This just feels like more of GM's mistreatment of their enthusiast community. I keep up with this forum because it has a great info, but this fiasco pretty much cements me away from GM cars barring something extraordinary happening. But hey, as long as they protect their copyright, right?
MunchE is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 08:30 PM
  #71  
Prominent Member
 
Doug Harden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Red face Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by MunchE
Don't forget we've also got the guy who's "on our side" saying he's taking his ball and going home because we're so evil for reposting the links to this picture. This just feels like more of GM's mistreatment of their enthusiast community. I keep up with this forum because it has a great info, but this fiasco pretty much cements me away from GM cars barring something extraordinary happening. But hey, as long as they protect their copyright, right?
Man......I hate to sound mean, but try and keep up here....he's not being the petulant child....some of you here are.

Red has had his ears burnt more than once for even posting here....there was even a guy from the "sister car" division that made it his quest to get Red canned.....didn't happen...and Red continued to try and post GM's side of things.....

GM was severely p!ssed at Guy's article....they even ran an internal investigation to try and find out the source of what they percieved as an internal leak....Red felt some real heat on this one, even though he had nothing to do with it (he asked for those involved to not do it, but was ignored).....but he survived....

Now GM has gotten to the end of their patience with this Z06 debacle....they've decided to fight this theft.....and you can bet your @$$ that EVERYONE that is employed by GM is toying with their jobs and more by even being seen on these message boards....with VERY few exceptions.

Red has worked his @$$ off to get where he is and he'd be an idiot to jeapordize it by arguing with people who don't have a clue what's really going on......not to mention that he's told us 1,000 times that he can't argue because of the harm that it would cause him and GM.....I can't believe he's stayed around this long.

There are armys of people at GM trying to recapture the enthusiast market with products soon to be released......they KNOW they have work to do.

I can't believe how hard this seems to be to understand......
Doug Harden is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 08:32 PM
  #72  
Registered User
 
95GRNZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 2,779
Exclamation Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by Doug Harden
GM isn't threatening the average Joe....just a self righteous thief and his source.

Yup.

Got a different picture of him in the beginning, but after reading more and more into the various threads and his posts in them,the situation seems to be nothing but his personal crusade against GM.

I wonder exaclt what actually happened and what was said at his front door...?

TS
95GRNZ is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 08:51 PM
  #73  
Prominent Member
 
Doug Harden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

The original thread linked to in this thread was just locked by the moderator...."Scissors" pretty much OWNED that jerk "RC45"...basicly called him a liar about the "visit" from GM and RC45 just wussed out on the thread....LOL!!
Doug Harden is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 09:43 PM
  #74  
Registered User
 
Josh452's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Roseville, MI, USA
Posts: 1,496
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

While I don't know what to think, I did make the statement right when the pictures were posted on OTHER enthusiast web sites and other message boards that heads would roll.

I think I was slammed for saying that, but alas look at what we have hear.

To those that are bashing GM about this (if it is indeed true) need to take a step back and look at what is going on here. GM is 100% right in this situation.

As it has been pointed out, the fun is now ruined for everybody. This was the last straw and GM decided "enough is enough."

sigh
Josh452 is offline  
Old 11-15-2004, 09:47 PM
  #75  
Registered User
 
muckz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, ON Canada
Posts: 2,402
Re: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???

Originally Posted by Doug Harden
What we're talking about is similar to the fight over illegal downloading of songs and software.
Pfft. In Soviet Canada, song downloads YOU! Judge ruled there's nothing illegal about song sharing. Just have those pictures leak onto Canadian servers.


But on a more serious note... I am a little split. Theft, whereby declared as theft, should be prosecuted. The reason I say "declared" is because in Canada we are not under the same laws as in the US when it comes to downloading music. Anyhow. The problem with Z06 picture is that there is a leak somewhere, a security hole. The picture in itself may not be as bad as the fact that it may not be the only information that leaked or will leak through the same hole. That is why investigation is necessary. Otherwise you will have Japanese automakers coming out with Supras that look like Camaro a model year before the Camaro is released here.

--- edited out after reading the rest ---

BUT. If the person had been notified and warned that the links/pictures he/she/it posted are embargoed, I would only expect the individual to comply with the requests to remove them. And if s/h/it fails, then I can understand the legal action.

Last edited by muckz; 11-15-2004 at 10:35 PM.
muckz is offline  


Quick Reply: a little legal 'strong-arming' from GM???



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:39 PM.