Comparison Yanmar lawsuit.

[careyo63]

How many UTDA dealers are there still? 2? I think Fredricks is one and Spalding. I think spalding is on the list??

S.Hanes is Spalding which is UTDA. What was a big surprise was VN-1.

 

[phatgemi]

Accept a dealership/payoff and disavow any knowledge of greys and/or vn refurbs......We will soon be orphans.....

 

[kenmac]

You can sue anyone. I,m no attorney,but I just don't see how they can win. Looks like to me,that every auto parts store would be sued for selling after market auto parts. Used car dealer would be sued for selling ford, chevy, etc, for not being a dealer for them. If yanmar was going to do this, they should have done it yrs ago before so many were brought here and sold. I would love to see yanmar loose every suit they have filed :thumbsup:

 

[Car Doc]

Yeah my feelings also Yanmar picked one heck of a bad time to do this if they really are concerned about intellectual property rights.

At one time I literally couldn't wait to see a new USA Yanmar dealer and the new tractors but now I wouldn't walk across the street to see one.

I expect my tractor to last me a lifetime but even at that wont or probably wont ever buy another one. Anything is possible but I dont see anything positive coming out.

Even if they loose the little guys are going to be the big losers and that will trickle down to us as end users one way or another. my .002

 

[Gale Hawkins]

I agree this may do more harm than good. Time will tell.

 

[phatgemi]

Well I am sure Yanmar feels they are winning. Look at it. They have taken down some of the biggest grey/vn dealers and the lawsuit isn't even over.......their goal is being realized. If they can hammer Hoye, it will be a stake thru the heart!!!!

 

[clemsonfor]

what list ? I don't see them on the lawsuit list if, that's what your talking about. Don't know for how long,but RCO is listed as UTDA member

I thought someone said he was on the list earlier?

 

[John47]

If this is the way Yanmar act, then when I'm ready to buy new, I'll be looking to an orange or red tractor. IMHO this is only going to hurt Yanmar.
I can understand them trying to protect themselves from a lawsuit, but this is way overboard... I bought and accept my Yanmar didn't meet up to date safety regulations and I accept personal responsibility if anything happens to me. as I would had a bought an old JD, Ford or whatever.

 

[John47]

If this is the way Yanmar act, then when I'm ready to buy new, I'll be looking to an orange or red tractor. IMHO this is only going to hurt Yanmar.
I can understand them trying to protect themselves from a lawsuit, but this is way overboard... I bought and accept my Yanmar didn't meet up to date safety regulations and I accept personal responsibility if anything happens to me. as I would had a bought an old JD, Ford or whatever.

 

[winston1]

If this is the way Yanmar act, then when I'm ready to buy new, I'll be looking to an orange or red tractor. IMHO this is only going to hurt Yanmar.
I can understand them trying to protect themselves from a lawsuit, but this is way overboard... I bought and accept my Yanmar didn't meet up to date safety regulations and I accept personal responsibility if anything happens to me. as I would had a bought an old JD, Ford or whatever.

Well stated. Couldn't agree with you more!

 

[2manyrocks]

After receiving some updated information (thanks!) I researched across all regions and got the following current list of importers being sued by Yanmar, nationwide, on grounds of Intellectual Property/Trademark.

Intellectual Property Cases filed matching "Yanmar" (note there are two pages, 21 suits presently).

I bought a YM226D from a Yanmar dealer years ago. He's no longer a dealer, and I have to get parts where I can. The thing that bothers me as a owner of a YM made for the US and bought from a YM dealer at the time--is if these lawsuits make it economically unfeasible for places like Hoye and Fredericks to carry parts for the US only YMs, I'm up the creek on parts. Think about it--there are only so many US branded Yanmars. Is there enough of a parts market for just US branded Yanmars for anybody to carry parts only for them?

 

[Pete Judd]

2manytocks, I worry about the same thing. If I went to a "new" Yanmar dealer and asked for parts for a YM186D (a U.S. Yanmar), would they tell me to go away because they think that it is a grey market. I doubt that the new Yanmar America, will have any support for the older U.S. Yanmars. I also wonder, how this will work in the marine market, as I have owned boats with Yanmar engines and trannys. The last boat that I delivered down the west coast to Mexico, had a Yanmar engine. Will they shut down the marine market, because it has the same name?

 

[rScotty]

I'll disagree with this.
SNIP.....
I think the posters who say they would never consider buying a new Yanmar are misplacing their anger. Yanmar didn't create the safety regulation problem with gray market tractors, but they do have a right to defend their name and reputation in the new tractor market.

I agree that Yanmar has the right and the obligation to defend their name. But they chose the manner in which they would do so, and their choice has managed to alienate both their customer base and defame their own brand name......not for the first time....and for what gain?
They may win the battle, but it seems they are giving away the war.
This isn't the way for a company to win consumer confidence.

Rightly or wrongly, I think that is what this thread is telling us.
rScotty

 

[Scotty Dive]

If I buy a 30 year old tractor am I to believe it has 2012 safety devices even if I bought it from a dealer? I have a 42 old year old jeep, If I get hurt in an accident, do I get to sue jeep because it doesn't have air bags?

 

[Katahdin]

I see a consumer base being upset about potentially losing a "cheap" supply of used tractors. Yanmar took their issues to the dealers, not the customer base. I've bought a new Yanmar tractor so I'm one of their consumers. My confidence is in the reliability and versatility of Yanmar's 2012 product, I think other new customers would only be concerned with that as well, not 30-year-old re-manufactured imports.

 

[Car Doc]

I see a consumer base being upset about potentially losing a "cheap" supply of used tractors. Yanmar took their issues to the dealers, not the customer base. I've bought a new Yanmar tractor so I'm one of their consumers. My confidence is in the reliability and versatility of Yanmar's 2012 product, I think other new customers would only be concerned with that as well, not 30-year-old re-manufactured imports.

You would after all you bought a new machine you have nothing too worry about do ya? You can think all you want about what we think but until you have something to worry about dont put words in our mouths. Try walk a mile in another mans shoes my friend before you tell him he is wrong. my .002

edit: btw my tractor was anything but cheap and so are plenty of others on here we bought the name too and proudly I might add. fwtw.

 

[California]

... And then there are those of us who own real US Yanmars and hope to have continued support as good as we have enjoyed with active 3rd-party sources available alongside Yanmar-USA's continued support. I think they are limiting what could be a good brand image, when they disown their overseas models.

Ford etc long ago abandoned support for their WWII era tractors but I've never hear of them actively restricting the present owners' ability to buy and sell. I wish Yanmar would follow that model.

 

[284 International]

I see a consumer base being upset about potentially losing a "cheap" supply of used tractors. Yanmar took their issues to the dealers, not the customer base.

I am upset by Yanmar's assertion that if I advertise a tractor I lawfully acquired that I am violating their trademark. A company making that claim, whether to someone else, or to me, is evil, wrong, and unjust, irrespective of whether I am the target or not. I think it is important to discuss the core issue, and, as mentioned before, it is this: Yanmar is claiming that they retain control over who is allowed to sell their products, whether they can be advertised, and whether or not it is legal to buy or sell parts for machines they made.

There are numerous other ancillary things that get roped into this discussion, like the quality of refurbished units, personal responsibility, and so forth. At its heart, though, the question is this: If I buy a tractor (or pair of shoes, a car, kitchen knives, watches, etc), is it legal for me to later sell it, or should the original manufacturer be able to sue me and take it, with no compensation to me? This is the crux of the issue, and the fundamental question.

 

[swick1]

I am upset by Yanmar's assertion that if I advertise a tractor I lawfully acquired that I am violating their trademark. A company making that claim, whether to someone else, or to me, is evil, wrong, and unjust, irrespective of whether I am the target or not. I think it is important to discuss the core issue, and, as mentioned before, it is this: Yanmar is claiming that they retain control over who is allowed to sell their products, whether they can be advertised, and whether or not it is legal to buy or sell parts for machines they made.

There are numerous other ancillary things that get roped into this discussion, like the quality of refurbished units, personal responsibility, and so forth. At its heart, though, the question is this: If I buy a tractor (or pair of shoes, a car, kitchen knives, watches, etc), is it legal for me to later sell it, or should the original manufacturer be able to sue me and take it, with no compensation to me? This is the crux of the issue, and the fundamental question.

How could any American judge allow this with a clear conscience? I guess the riaa and yanmar both still own whatever they "sell" us. Enjoy your freedom.

At least we can't as citizens be held indefinitely without being charged with a crime... oh wait... nevermind.

http://www.infowars.com/federal-court-rules-in-favour-of-indefinite-detention-of-us-citizens/