anjong-ni Posted July 22 Report Share Posted July 22 (edited) If I recall, Doug Richardson proclaimed himself "owner" of the expired "Aut-Ord-Co" copyright. By the way, Doug owned "Cutts" too.... No fair making compensators that "LOOK like a Cutts" without paying Doug's estate. HEAR THAT KAHR? ...Phil OFFERS YOU CAN NOT REFUSE Edited July 22 by anjong-ni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reconbob Posted July 22 Author Report Share Posted July 22 I want to thank everyone who reached out to me on this. A member sent my post to a patent and trademark attorney who contacted me. The guy seems very knowledgeable and is also a Thompson and WW2 buff which certainly helps. So I am going to work with him to get this sorted out and will report back. Bob 6 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deerslayer Posted July 22 Report Share Posted July 22 Glad to hear that Bob! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted July 22 Report Share Posted July 22 Bob, Looking forward to how this is resolved. Now I don't have to send Saeilo/Kahr a link to the immortal and infamous REPLICA Thread. That would be cruel and unusual punishment. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgreen Posted July 22 Report Share Posted July 22 Well I can say I will never purchase anything Kahr arms because of this! This is just petty that they would bully someone like this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68coupe Posted July 22 Report Share Posted July 22 2 hours ago, pgreen said: Well I can say I will never purchase anything Kahr arms because of this! This is just petty that they would bully someone like this! Many years ago, VW did the same thing with shops and parts vendors that used "Bug" or "Bugs" in their name. Some buckled, some didn't. If you look around, you can figure out which ones stuck to their guns. Even many of the ones that caved are still in business, but never bothered to change back. They can't control reproduction parts that happen to fit their cars no longer in production. NOS parts is a grey area, but the case got overturned in court. I am not an attorney, and I can't quote the case law, but if I remember correctly, it had to do with transfer of ownership of the actual parts and being able to sell them as genuine. Reproduction parts had to be clearly advertised and sold as such. My humble 2 cents, Karl, 68coupe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted July 24 Report Share Posted July 24 On 7/21/2025 at 8:24 PM, anjong-ni said: If I recall, Doug Richardson proclaimed himself "owner" of the expired "Aut-Ord-Co" copyright. By the way, Doug owned "Cutts" too.... No fair making compensators that "LOOK like a Cutts" without paying Doug's estate. HEAR THAT KAHR? ...Phil OFFERS YOU CAN NOT REFUSE Doug’s claim to register the Aut-Ord-Co trademark was rejected by the government as a trademark infringement on Kahr. Doug was given the chance to appeal, and he chose not to do so. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted July 24 Report Share Posted July 24 Kahr has a trademark on the current bullet logo, and also on the general shape of a TSMG with L-drum. I have a copy of it that their CEO handed me at an NRA Convention in 2014. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted July 24 Report Share Posted July 24 UNLESS MILLIONS OF BUCKS IS INVOLVED IT ALL MEANS NOTHING. putting some barrels together refinishing and whatever. and making blank guns which he said that is all over now.{ he said last one sold.} why worry about a letter from them.. Just go on to whatever you are doing. its not like a factory, and a line of employers building guns, drums and parts. if it ever was you would already have a attorney on retainer or working for you. so carry on Bob, life's too short to sweat over that. RON K. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHollow Posted July 25 Report Share Posted July 25 (edited) Owing patents and trademarks can be similar to real estate. Infringement is like trespass and buying a property does not necessarily mean you own it (wanna buy the Brooklyn Bridge?). An owner will loose rights if they do not regularly clear out trespassers. Long time trespassers can gain rights to the property. I have seen a few infringement cases end quickly with a negotiated settlement where the infringer pays the owner a buck for a license. Then the public is treated to a press release that claims company A has agreed to pay an undisclosed sum for a license for company B technology. These settlements are particularly good for the owner when their property rights are hazy. Also, company C might decide to withdraw because that undisclosed sum sounds like a lot of dough. Edited July 25 by HHollow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Henley Posted July 25 Report Share Posted July 25 On 7/21/2025 at 8:31 PM, reconbob said: I want to thank everyone who reached out to me on this. A member sent my post to a patent and trademark attorney who contacted me. The guy seems very knowledgeable and is also a Thompson and WW2 buff which certainly helps. So I am going to work with him to get this sorted out and will report back. Bob I think this is the correct approach and a written response from your representative setting forth your legal rights seems like the appropriate response. For the rest of us, my suggestion is to boycott any products sold by this company. No need to buy anything from them until they change their MO. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troll Posted July 25 Report Share Posted July 25 Maybe they could use their lawyer money to make better guns instead of lawfare? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryboy77 Posted August 3 Report Share Posted August 3 Wouldnt buy any of their junk.They have a terrible track record.Kahr is making $ off Nostalgia.They produce guns to hit you with that Nostalgic adoration only to have your dream turn to a nightmare with a unreliable jam-O-matic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojeep Posted August 6 Report Share Posted August 6 (edited) Patent and Copy Right Infringement McBernie Cars was sued by Ferrari for making Cars that looked like a Ferrari 365 GTS, nicknamed the "Daytona"....the cars were in production before they caught the eye of the "Miami Vice" Production Team. Several Black/ Tan Cars were ordered for the Show. McBernie's Ferrari had difference in the design from the original 365GTS, no wing windows, but Badging was "Ferrari" on and in the Cars. Ferrari won the Law Suit., putting McBernie out of Business and forcing Miami Vice to remove the "Daytona" from its Television Show. Edited August 6 by jojeep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p51 Posted August 6 Report Share Posted August 6 (edited) On 7/24/2025 at 1:01 PM, colt21a said: UNLESS MILLIONS OF BUCKS IS INVOLVED IT ALL MEANS NOTHING. putting some barrels together refinishing and whatever. and making blank guns which he said that is all over now.{ he said last one sold.} why worry about a letter from them.. Just go on to whatever you are doing. its not like a factory, and a line of employers building guns, drums and parts. if it ever was you would already have a attorney on retainer or working for you. so carry on Bob, life's too short to sweat over that. RON K. Ask anyone on the receiving end of Disney's wrath. Some trademark holders will go after a private person making one item sold for $5. I have a friend who handles international copyright issues in Asia and he's told me some interesting "crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women" stories that ended in a lot of pain. Edited August 6 by p51 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anjong-ni Posted August 6 Report Share Posted August 6 "forcing Miami Vice to remove the "Daytona" from its Television Show" "Is that a..."Testosterone?" A sweet, young Miami-ite to Don Johnson...Miami Vice. ...Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSU Tiger Posted August 15 Report Share Posted August 15 You're doing the right thing, Bob. Lawyers speak "leagalese" to each other and understand it. I honestly believe there's a way around this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choppero Posted August 15 Report Share Posted August 15 I make and sell Thompson parts and do conversions for 1927A-1 from my website (name withheld to protect the business) I'm even making a cocking handle that copies the 1921 design. Bob has been very helpful in getting these done. I could change the part names to TSMG but that would really piss me off. This crap from Kahr makes me wonder If our community is at some risk. I for one would donate to a legal defense fund. How about you? ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banjo Posted September 11 Report Share Posted September 11 Did not Doug Richardson crank out a ton of documents and items marked with the Thompson Logo? I think he would look up, for a fee, Colt serial numbers and send out official looking letter's stating the original owner of a particular weapon. I seem to remember him saying that any claim to the name or logos had long since expired and he had no fear in publishing anything he wanted using the logos. I'm sure I have the precise facts wrong but you get the general idea. I know I bought manuals from him that had the name and logos on/in them. I'm sure I read something where Doug spelled out, in detail, how no one could have any claim to the original names and logos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted September 16 Report Share Posted September 16 On 9/11/2025 at 4:24 PM, Banjo said: Did not Doug Richardson crank out a ton of documents and items marked with the Thompson Logo? I think he would look up, for a fee, Colt serial numbers and send out official looking letter's stating the original owner of a particular weapon. I seem to remember him saying that any claim to the name or logos had long since expired and he had no fear in publishing anything he wanted using the logos. I'm sure I have the precise facts wrong but you get the general idea. I know I bought manuals from him that had the name and logos on/in them. I'm sure I read something where Doug spelled out, in detail, how no one could have any claim to the original names and logos. Yes, but he was wrong. He just never got challenged on it. When he attempted to register the trademark for himself, he was rejected due to Kahr’s registered trademark. Doug was given the opportunity to appeal, but did not do so. He liked to use the early Aut-Ord-Co bullet trademark, which was considered too close to the Thompson bullet logo trademarked by Kahr in his application to register it. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wv1928 Posted September 24 Report Share Posted September 24 `GLAD TO SEE YOU HAVE FOUND SOME HELP BOB ! I AM SURE EVERYTHING WILL WORK OUT FOR YOU. HAVE A GREAT DAY. Quote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now