Chuck Yeager sues airline for unauthorized use of his name

[warbird1]

Here it is:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/12/30/23224.htm

I'm curious to hear our resident lawyer's take on this. August and Beasley - does he have a winnable case or not?

[mustangdriver]

Without a doubt he has a case. Change those names to sports stars and see how fast there would be case.

[warbird1]

Without a doubt he has a case. Change those names to sports stars and see how fast there would be case.

I'm not so sure about that. A few issues:

1) His name is in the public domain and the act he is famous for was done as a government employee.

2) His name was not used as an endorsement, but simply mentioned, so there is no implication Yeager was approving the service or the company.

3) There is no misrepresentation in the advertisement, but simply a statement of fact, although the connection between Yeager and wi-fi service is an extremely obscure reference.

[Jack Cook]

I'm embarassed for him

[Fouga23]

t*sser

[Taylor Stevenson]

I'm embarassed for him

agreed! this type of behavior seems to be a common theme with him. Isnt he the one who wont let a P-51 have his paint scheme without royalties? (I had always heard that, am I correct?)

[Jack Cook]

Yup, thats why Rousch repainted his to "Gentleman Jim"

[ZRX61]

I'm embarassed for him

agreed! this type of behavior seems to be a common theme with him. Isnt he the one who wont let a P-51 have his paint scheme without royalties? (I had always heard that, am I correct?)

Same reason I'm trying to work out how to build a Cobra without giving 1c to that jackass Shelby.

As for the Yeager/Virgin deal I guess thats aimed at people who don't know anything about aviation & still think that Yeager is some kind of hero... instead of what he really is....

[P51Mstg]

I worked for Chrysler 25 years ago and knew Mr Shelby. Nicest guy in the world and 180 degrees from Yeager. You can build a Cobra and not have to pay him anything

As a lawyer (not an expert in this area though) I can say he doesn't have a case since they didn't have him endorsing anything. Also from my corporate knowledge anything like this would be run past legal before it got out. That's standard procedure. If there was anything wrong with it they never would have used it. Mr. Branson didn't get to where he is being stupid

Also please note that Neil Armstrong didn't do anything. That tends to tell me he is right and Yeager is wrong.

Mark H

[ZRX61]

I worked for Chrysler 25 years ago and knew Mr Shelby. Nicest guy in the world and 180 degrees from Yeager. You can build a Cobra and not have to pay him anything

Maybe directly, but I'm including indirectly as in buying parts from people who have licencing deals with him.... & as I actually used to build Cobras I know thats just about impossible.

& because of Sheby's hiring practices I darn near lost my home thanks to him.... So I know EXACTLY what kind of man he is. (PM if you want the details).

[The Inspector]

Any shred of respect I had for Mr. Y evaporated when I read his autobiography many moons ago . It was full to the brim with 'dig ME', but I was particularly disenchanted with how he dealt with VOYAGER by dismissing it as 'anyone can fly around the world with a big enough gas tank' while his book glowed with his setting speed and time records that no one seems to give a rats patootie about between Podunk and East Mule Shoe in a Cheyenne 2. And his exploits since then have kept him in the shade as far as I'm concerned, let him continue to be a legend in his own mind. If Slick hadn't been so greedy, he'd have been first (or second behind George Welsh) through and Y would be 'oh, yeah, that next guy to do it'.

[tom d. friedman]

he sure took his plug's worth for rolex watches all these years!! i agree, he was under employment by the u.s. military while performing his historic feats, thus he has no right to sqwawk.

[Rogue]

IIRC He did not own "Glamorous Glen" did he?
All he did was stick the name on it anyway, the rest was all USAAF.

I have no rights to the paint scheme my work vehicle, do I?

[k5083]

Coincidentally, a friend of mine blogged last week about a development in another Yeager case, this one brought against Cingular Wireless. This is not a final resolution, but CY's claims survived summary judgment, which means that the judge considered his claims to have enough merit to be worthy of trial.

http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2009/12/no- ... laims.html

And when something goes to trial, anything can happen.

Her earlier comment on the same case: http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2008/06/yea ... ds-at.html

The facts in the two cases are different, but Prof. Tushnet's comments give you an idea of the kinds of issues that are raised in these cases generally.

August

Last edited by k5083 on Fri Jan 01, 2010 6:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[ZRX61]

IIRC He did not own "Glamorous Glen" did he?
All he did was stick the name on it anyway, the rest was all USAAF.

I have no rights to the paint scheme my work vehicle, do I?

Which brings to mind the Memphis Belle debacle...