|
Author
|
Topic: Carroll Shelby sued by Denice Halicki
|
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 1349
From: Poinciana, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 12-31-2004 06:22 PM
 
Denice Halicki, widow of Toby 'Gone in 60 Seconds' Halicki (the original) and owner of all rights to anything representing that film or the 2000 remake is sueing Shelby over his marketing of the 'Eleanor' clones.
As much as I like Shelby, I agree with her. He had absolutely nothing to do with the character of Eleanor, was in no way involved with the remake and only got involved when he found he could make money by slapping his name on yet another in a long line of his bull**** 'continuation' models.
I hope she gets lots of money from him and Sanderson marketing, and maybe the destruction of otherwise noce old original Mustangs will cease. And just in case anyone was wondering, they do NOT take beat, worn-out old basket cases and 'save' them. They take nice condition Mustangs that should rightfully stay original and continue to represent what the Mustang was...and is.
Just my 2 cents.------------------
1971 'J' code 429 Mach 1
1976 'Starsky & Hutch' Torino
1988 Lincoln Mark VII LSC
1990 Lincoln Mark VII LSC "I'm too old to grow up now!
|
IIGood
Moderator Posts: 3919
From: Arnold, MD, USA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 12-31-2004 06:40 PM
Here's what I don't get though...All Shelby did was give his blessing to a third-party company to make the reproductions as "GT500-E" models...no direct mention of Eleanor in there... Also, wouldn't Bruckheimer have to have gotten legal permission to remake the movie? I don't know what it's like in the movie biz, but I know in music, an artist has to get another artist's permission (or at least pay royalties for the copyright) when they do cover songs. Would the movie industry work the same way? ------------------
Frank S.----MCA Member 40390
'03 Mustang GT coupe
'99 Mustang coupe
'77 Ghia--"II Good" [This message has been edited by IIGood (edited 12-31-2004).]
|
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 1349
From: Poinciana, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 12-31-2004 07:47 PM
Well, of course Bruckhiemer and all else involved in the remake had the rights to make the movie from Halicki. She was payed well, I'm sure.
The 'GT-500 E' is a replica of the car known as 'Eleanor' from the movie, and Halicki is the owner of all intelectual properties from that movie.
I don't think the fact that the car does not actually say 'Eleanor' on it is not going to save Shelby from losing.
I don't like it because he had nothing to do with it. Shelby gave his 'authorization' to the project, but just what exactly is he authorizing? A replica of a car he had nothing to do with?
Maybe I'll go and 'authorize' a Knight-Rider replica! That should make it officail! ------------------
1971 'J' code 429 Mach 1
1976 'Starsky & Hutch' Torino
1988 Lincoln Mark VII LSC
1990 Lincoln Mark VII LSC "I'm too old to grow up now!
|
IIGood
Moderator Posts: 3919
From: Arnold, MD, USA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 12-31-2004 08:53 PM
Initially, no, he had nothing to do with the 1971 Mach 1 Eleanor.But, in the 2000 remake, Bruckheimer turned Eleanor into a 1967 Shelby GT500. Even if it was just in name (I don't think any real Shelbys were used for the flick, were they?). Had he wanted to stay true to the original Eleanor, he should've at least used a Mach 1...if not a '71 Mach 1. ------------------
Frank S.----MCA Member 40390
'03 Mustang GT coupe
'99 Mustang coupe
'77 Ghia--"II Good"
|
Fastback68
Gearhead Posts: 4511
From: Sucat, Paranaque, Philippines
Registered: Jul 99
|
posted 12-31-2004 08:53 PM
quote:
And just in case anyone was wondering, they do NOT take beat, worn-out old basket cases and 'save' them.
Confirmed. I saw this documentary, and the Shelby rep actually said they'd had some opposition in the beginning 'cos folks thought they were using nice cars, but as we could all see, they were saving rust buckets. The camera then panned across three or four shells - presumably the worst they could find. They'd all been stripped and may have looked ugly to casual viewers, but they were some of the nicest shells I've seen! Every one was a no-brainer restoration.
|
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 1349
From: Poinciana, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-01-2005 12:34 AM
Yep, all of the 'Eleanors' used in the 2000 remake were 67-68 Fastbacks, not true Shelbys. Most of them were fixed up only to the degree that they could perform whatever specific stunt they were designed to do, like spins, driving backwards at speed or a ramp to ground jump. The drivetrains were whatever they had in them, and only one of the cars had an engine replacement. They used a 351 'sportsman' crate motor from Ford for the car used in the high-speed river/canal scene.
There was only one real Shelby GT-500 in the movie: It was the unrestored, clapped out rust-bucket given to Reno( Nicolas Cage) by his brother Kip (Giovanni Ribisi) at the very end of the movie.
After filming was complete, this car was fully restored to 'Eleanor' status to be the only fully-functional vehicle of them all, and given the Bruckheimer for his personal use. Interstingly, it is the only one that had a functional sail-panel gas cap, a functional side-exit exhaust, and a 428 big block.
About a year or so later this car was sold at Barrett-Jackson for about (I think) $180,000. A preposterous amount of money for a car that is a replica of a car that never existed,( an 'Eleanor'-style GT-500) and not even one of the cars actually used in the movie.
I like the design of the cars a lot, and I would love to own one. But that doesn't make it official. ------------------
1971 'J' code 429 Mach 1
1976 'Starsky & Hutch' Torino
1988 Lincoln Mark VII LSC
1990 Lincoln Mark VII LSC "I'm too old to grow up now!
|
TomP
Gearhead Posts: 6376
From: Delta BC Canada
Registered: Dec 99
|
posted 01-01-2005 01:27 AM
I hope your Knight Rider replicas aren't over $150,000 , unless that's the David Hasselhoff signature edition. 
|
sigtauenus
Gearhead Posts: 3969
From: Va Beach
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 01-01-2005 06:33 AM
Um, sorry guys, I don't get what this lady's beef is. If the original movie had a Mach 1, and the new car is a Shelby, what's wrong with Shelby marketing the car? Seems to me like there are no ties between Eleanor and the original movie. Also seems to me that "Eleanor", at least cosmetically, would be tied to Bruckheimer, as its technically his movie that had it, and as long as Shelby had rights taken care with him, he should be good to go. If I had a name like Shelby, you can bet your butt I'd be taking advantage of it and making a profit. His program ruining it for the common man is a interesting theory, but considering there was 789,618 mustangs built in 67-68, of which 113,623 were fastbacks, and the price the GT-500E's are going for, I doubt that for Shelby is buying more than a couple hundred of them. I think the average Joe who got his hands on a fastback and thinks he struck gold, or the average Joe who wants a fastback, thinking he will strike gold, is driving the price up. For what its worth, my opinion is there are plenty of mustangs out there to represent what the mustang is, and also plenty available to make into whatever you want, be that an Eleanor or a shaggycarpetmobile. Oops just reread the original post and saw Halicki has rights to the 2000 movie too. I don't get that at all. I'm just going to twist this a little bit, because I really don't know how all this legal bs works. BUT, the car in the movie was always referred to as a SHELBY GT-500, which seems to me that if it wasn't a SHELBY car, they gave him rights to it by putting his name on it. And if they now want to say that it was their creation, I think he has a fair argument to say they shouldn't have used his name in the movie and maybe offer a counter-suit.
|
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 1349
From: Poinciana, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 01-01-2005 08:41 AM
Her beef is that they are marketing a car called 'Eleanor', a character name and a car she has rights to from a movie that she controls the rights to. As far as referring to it as a 'GT-500' in the movie, that is a known actual car name in existence already. I don't see any possible conflict there. Funny thing to me is: Chip Foose was the actual designer of the modified car used in the 2000 remake, yet his name is mentioned nowhere in the Sanderson/Shelby 'authorized' literature. Shamefully, to the younger, or very casual uninformed viewers, the 'Eleanor' car in the 2000 movie is thought to be a typical GT-500, not a wildly modified custom creation. Some of these kids now think that you could go to your local Ford store back in 67 and buy a car with 18" aluminum rims, unidirectional tires, PIAA halogen lights, factory-installed NOS, Total-Control suspension, etc...
A friend of mine has a 67 GT-350S, and when he tells people at car shows/cruises "this is a 67 Shelby GT-***. LIke the car in the movie", they sometimes look strangely at the car because it does not look like the one in the movie.
|
sigtauenus
Gearhead Posts: 3969
From: Va Beach
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 01-01-2005 09:22 AM
Gottcha. I didn't realize the catch was in the name. I thought it was a GT-500E,
but from looking around the Sanderson webpage, they do refer to it as "Eleanor."http://www.sandersonsales.com/images/gt500e/basemodel.htm
|
69maverick
Moderator Posts: 1539
From: Thomaston,CT.
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 01-01-2005 09:50 AM
I didn't notice where they said or refered to it as Eleanor but I don't care what they call it I would like to have one!!
|
n2oMike
Gearhead Posts: 3058
From: Spencer, WV
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 01-01-2005 06:03 PM
Ole' Shelby is a greedy b*stard. He'd do the same thing she did if in her position. He's all about the almighty dollar now, and has been for a long, long time.------------------
Mike Burch
66 mustang real street
302 4-speed 289 heads
10.63 @ 129.3
http://www.geocities.com/carbedstangs/cmml_mburch.html
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/healey/367
http://www.mustangworks.com/cgi-bin/moi-display.cgi?220
|
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 48752
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-01-2005 06:07 PM
Yup, he did the same thing to Factory Five Racing, so what goes around, comes around. Live by the sword {or lawsuit}, die by the sword {or lawsuit}.Keeps the barristers fat and happy. ------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 351C 4V/FMX/3.25 Open
'70 Mustang Convertible 250 I6/3 speed/2.79 Open
'72 Mustang Sprint Hardtop 351C 4V/FMX/4.30 Trac Loc
'94 F-150 XL 5.8L/E4OD/3.55 Limited Slip
|
Robert K
Gearhead Posts: 706
From: Nashville, TN
Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 01-02-2005 11:55 AM
Shelby's just getting a dose of his own medicine as far as I'm concerned.
|
MLariviere
Moderator Posts: 4235
From: Biddeford,Me.USA
Registered: May 99
|
posted 01-02-2005 10:58 PM
quote:
Confirmed. I saw this documentary, and the Shelby rep actually said they'd had some opposition in the beginning 'cos folks thought they were using nice cars, but as we could all see, they were saving rust buckets. The camera then panned across three or four shells - presumably the worst they could find. They'd all been stripped and may have looked ugly to casual viewers, but they were some of the nicest shells I've seen! Every one was a no-brainer restoration.[/B]
And all the cars they deemed unfit for use were cut up and scrapped. 
|
Robert K
Gearhead Posts: 706
From: Nashville, TN
Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 01-03-2005 09:26 AM
Think about it. Unique Performance is in business to make money and time is money. They are going to look for the best condition car they can possibly find and can afford to find the best. And I still say they are artificially driving up the prices of these old cars. And you're darned right Shelby would have done the same thing if in Denice Halicki's position.
|
427Fastback
Gearhead Posts: 530
From: N.Vancouver.B.C
Registered: Jan 2005
|
posted 02-04-2005 06:22 PM
Lets not forget about the time old C/S woke up and found regi's for some un-assembled 66 converts or was wondering around and tripped over 20 or so rusty 427 Cobra frames with valid numbers that had been invisible for 30 or more years.When i was bulding Cobra replicars (circa 1990) i remeber him condeming every one that did it.If you cant beat them join them..I used to have a lot of respect for him.Now he just makes me angry.For 15 bucks I'll autograph what ever you want............------------------
68 Fastback 427MR 4 spd.Owned since 77.Deluxe interior,8000 tach,140 speedo,am/fm,tilt.
|
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 48752
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 02-05-2005 05:48 PM
I feel the same way. He milks more than a dairy farmer.------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 351C 4V/FMX/3.25 Open
'70 Mustang Convertible 250 I6/3 speed/2.79 Open
'72 Mustang Sprint Hardtop 351C 4V/FMX/4.30 Trac Loc
'94 F-150 XL 5.8L/E4OD/3.55 Limited Slip
|
JCQuinn@work
Gearhead Posts: 998
From: Lakewood, CO, USA
Registered: Jun 2001
|
posted 02-05-2005 07:39 PM
How much does he give to charity?John
|
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 2005
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 02-26-2005 09:48 PM
She holds the rights to the movie, i doubt she holds rights to nicolas cage, or anyone else who "Starred" in the movie, so i don't see her being correct to hold the right to a car, which obviously she did not design, but was also a star in the movie....original was a 73 just to keep you guys straight  She seems to be a money grabber just as bad as shelby.
|
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 1349
From: Poinciana, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 02-27-2005 08:59 AM
Yes, you are correct about her not owning the rights to 'Nicholas Cage', or to 'Shelby GT-500', both of whom were 'actors' that starred in a movie she owns complete rights to.
But she DOES own the rights to all CHARACTERS from the movie. Nicholas Cage, or anybody else for that matter would not legally be able develop and market any new products bearing the name or likeness of the 'Randall Memphis Raines' character, for she owns the rights to that.
Similarly, she cannot prevent anyone from making cash off of the 'Shelby GT-500' name,(Carroll Shelby takes care of that issue himself!), but she DOES own all rights to the character name and likeness of 'Eleanor'.And by the way....even though the original 1974 Movie referred to its 'Eleanor'as a "73. The last of the big ones.", it was clearly a 1971/72 dressed up to look like a 73.
The movie took over 2 years to film, and a lot of time was spent getting the 'Eleanors' ready for filming. By the time they were ready, the 73 year model had come and gone, and the 'big' stang was also gone. So they updated it somewhat and added the 'last of the big ones' as a sort of uniqueness about the car. and by the way, part 2: I like the original movie best. A little bit of cheap, bad actors flopping around, and tons of great car action.
The remake had lots and lots of very expensive bad acting, and only a tiny bit of cool car action. They got the ingrediants wrong!
|
Dubz
Gearhead Posts: 2005
From: Manitoba Canada
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 02-27-2005 03:27 PM
I still had the original in the dvd player when i opened this post I would think at most she holds rights to the name, but that may just be me. [This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 02-27-2005).]
|
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 1349
From: Poinciana, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 02-27-2005 09:32 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Dubz:
I would think at most she holds rights to the name, but that may just be me. [This message has been edited by Dubz (edited 02-27-2005).]
Uhh, yeah...that's what she has been complaining about all along. She owns the rights to the name 'Eleanor' as used to represent the car of the same name used in the movie. She also owns the rights to the likeness of both versions: The yellow '73' from the first movie has a recognizably unique custom paint job and color, and the 'Shelby' from the remake is a complete custom, one of a kind version created explicitally for the movie...that she owns rights to.
Just like the car from 'Starsky & Hutch'. Although the TV and Movie production companies cannot claim to own anything to do with a Ford Gran Torino, they CAN and DO own the rights to the likeness of the car as presented in the movie and TV show. No one can profit from the display or sale of the 'Starsky & Hutch'-appearing car without thier permission.
Interestingly, the rights to the image of the 'Striped Tomato'(copyrighted phrase) as it appeared in the TV series is not held by the same people who own the rights to the car's image from the movie.
There are some details on the movie car that were purposely different from the TV cars so they would not be identical:
The bumpers have no rub strips or bumperettes.
The stripe is painted a little differently.
The sight-shields are red instead of gray.
The name 'Zebra Three'(exact spelling) is also owned by someone connected to the car and can't be used for profit without permission.The whole deal hinges on the fact that these cars are legally considered to be 'characters', or intellectual property of the owners of the rights, and if someone was to profit from those images without permission, then the holders of those rights would them considered to be damaged, requiring payment.
I hope Denice Halicki gets so much money that Sanderson is forced to stop selling these bastardized, over-priced rolling testaments to greed and avarice, and that these cars are once again primarily enjoyed for what they do emotionally for thier owners, not for what they can do financially for them.
|
fordguy
Gearhead Posts: 121
From: springhill,fl
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 04-13-2005 04:55 PM
anybody know what happened with this?
|
cobravenom71
Gearhead Posts: 1349
From: Poinciana, Fl USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 04-13-2005 05:26 PM
Yeah, there was some agreement reached whereby no additional vehicles will be sold or marketed by the name 'Eleanor', and Denice will recieve some damages due her from the 'Eleanors' that were already sold. The cars themselves can still be made as they were, I think.
However, it seems that there is still some advertising using the 'Eleanor' name, so who knows?
|
SteveLaRiviere
Administrator Posts: 48752
From: Saco, Maine
Registered: May 99
|
posted 03-01-2006 06:26 PM
I read that this was dismissed, and all over now.------------------
'70 Mustang Mach 1 - '70 Mustang Convertible - '72 Mustang Sprint - '94 F-150 XL
|
