Is Chevy Launching SS Sub-Brand?
Does Autoblog Know That Trademarks and Patents Are Two Different Things?

Ronnie Schreiber
by Ronnie Schreiber

Last week General Motors filed an application with United States Patent & Trademark Office to register SS as a trademark ( search for 85597402 here). Though Chevrolet has used the SS designation since the early 1960s, first appearing on the ’61 Impala SS, it has apparently never before taken the steps to protect it as a trademark. Trademark registrations have to be for a specific use and in this case the use specified is “Motor land passenger vehicles, namely, automobiles.”

There’s been talk that GM will be reviving a storied nameplate for the civilian version of the RWD Caprice PPV cop cruiser, a name that will also grace Chevy’s forthcoming NASCAR “stock” cars. Some have suggested that the new model will be marketed simply as the Chevy SS. Chevrolet did use the SS name on a concept car for the 2003 show circuit. Using SS as a nameplate, though, might create confusion with how the SS brand has been applied to other Chevy models, and also how any SS would be distinguished from a supposed Impala SS model, seen testing in spy shots.

Actually, the trademark application cites the first use in commerce of the SS mark as March, 16, 2009, which happens to be when the revived Camaro, including its SS variant, went on sale. To me that means that Chevy will continue to use SS as a performance variant even if there is a specific SS model. More likely, though, I think that Chevy is just doing with the SS brand what other manufacturers have done with SVT and AMG nametags, creating a performance sub-brand. Perhaps they are following Chrysler’s example with the SRT brand, creating a SS halo vehicle (as the Viper is to be for SRT) that helps promote regular Chevy’s offered with the SS package.

Now that the factual reporting is out of the way, I have to say that Autoblog’s coverage of this topic is one example of how patents and trademarks are used as interchangable terms when they really aren’t. They repeatedly conflate patents and trademarks in ways that betray a near complete ignorance of the different kinds of intellectual property, what they cover or how rights are secured.

Turns out, though, that General Motors just got around to patenting the designator SS on April 13, 2012.

No, that’s not correct. It turns out, though, that GM filed an application to register a trademark for SS on April 13, 2012. Trademarks are for words and symbols. Patents are for inventions and processes. Other than both being forms of intellectual property and both being managed by the same government agency (though completely different departments of that agency), patents and trademarks have nothing to do with each other. Furthermore, the phrase “patenting” wouldn’t have been applicable even if it was a patent. The application is just the first step in getting either a patent or a trademark.

Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, a realistic perspective on cars & car culture and the original 3D car site. If you found this post worthwhile, you can dig deeper at Cars In Depth. If the 3D thing freaks you out, don’t worry, all the photo and video players in use at the site have mono options. Thanks for reading – RJS

Ronnie Schreiber
Ronnie Schreiber

Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, the original 3D car site.

More by Ronnie Schreiber

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 20 comments
  • Trucky McTruckface Trucky McTruckface on Apr 19, 2012

    Ford sold an "Escort SS" in 1981 and a preproduction "Mustang SS" with the new H.O. 302 was featured in an early '82 issue of Motor Trend. Both cars were ultimately sold as "GTs" for the '82 model year. I always wondered how Ford got away with that. Now I know the answer.

  • Namstrap Namstrap on Apr 19, 2012

    I remembering hearing the Jaguar link a long time ago. Swallow Sidecars was the company, and their first car was the Jaguar SS (for Swallow Sidecars). The guy that told me about it claimed he had me Bill Lyons.

  • Theflyersfan The wheel and tire combo is tragic and the "M Stripe" has to go, but overall, this one is a keeper. Provided the mileage isn't 300,000 and the service records don't read like a horror novel, this could be one of the last (almost) unmodified E34s out there that isn't rotting in a barn. I can see this ad being taken down quickly due to someone taking the chance. Recently had some good finds here. Which means Monday, we'll see a 1999 Honda Civic with falling off body mods from Pep Boys, a rusted fart can, Honda Rot with bad paint, 400,000 miles, and a biohazard interior, all for the unrealistic price of $10,000.
  • Theflyersfan Expect a press report about an expansion of VW's Mexican plant any day now. I'm all for worker's rights to get the best (and fair) wages and benefits possible, but didn't VW, and for that matter many of the Asian and European carmaker plants in the south, already have as good of, if not better wages already? This can drive a wedge in those plants and this might be a case of be careful what you wish for.
  • Jkross22 When I think about products that I buy that are of the highest quality or are of great value, I have no idea if they are made as a whole or in parts by unionized employees. As a customer, that's really all I care about. When I think about services I receive from unionized and non-unionized employees, it varies from C- to F levels of service. Will unionizing make the cars better or worse?
  • Namesakeone I think it's the age old conundrum: Every company (or industry) wants every other one to pay its workers well; well-paid workers make great customers. But nobody wants to pay their own workers well; that would eat into profits. So instead of what Henry Ford (the first) did over a century ago, we will have a lot of companies copying Nike in the 1980s: third-world employees (with a few highly-paid celebrity athlete endorsers) selling overpriced products to upper-middle-class Americans (with a few urban street youths willing to literally kill for that product), until there are no more upper-middle-class Americans left.
  • ToolGuy I was challenged by Tim's incisive opinion, but thankfully Jeff's multiple vanilla truisms have set me straight. Or something. 😉
Next