Get your Roxor now. Found to infringe on Jeep design

OP

DanW

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #2
OP

Nomad

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #3
If, as the article states, none of the dimensions are exactly the same, and no parts are carryovers, then Mahindra could’ve styled it any way they chose. They chose to capitalize on the Jeep appearance without permission. Everything about a Roxor that is “wholesome off-road fun” according to the author of the article could’ve been designed under a different body. In fact they can probably drop a different body on this same chassis. Intellectual property theft is still theft.
 
OP

cOtter

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #4
I’m sure that it was completely an accident / coincidence that the Roxor looks similar to a CJ.

Hey let me tell you about some property I have for sale..... and after that, I have an investment opportunity to talk with you about.
 
OP

fat_head

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #5
Mahindra owns a license to build "Jeeps" and has since 1947. They just can't call them "Jeep"

It's a inconvenient truth that FCA doesn't want to accept.
 
OP

GreyFox

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #6
Mahindra owns a license to build "Jeeps" and has since 1947. They just can't call them "Jeep"

It's a inconvenient truth that FCA doesn't want to accept.
Only for overseas I think. When they came across the ocean, that's when everyone got pissed.
 
OP

DanW

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #7
Mahindra owns a license to build "Jeeps" and has since 1947. They just can't call them "Jeep"

It's a inconvenient truth that FCA doesn't want to accept.
Not in the US, they don't. Never have. Only in India and maybe other parts of Asia. No company would EVER do that. If it were the case, then that court would have never ruled the way it did.
 
OP

Spank

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #9
Not in the US, they don't. Never have. Only in India and maybe other parts of Asia. No company would EVER license a company to do this in their home market. If it were the case, then that court would have never ruled the way it did.

Besides, this thing is not a licensed built Jeep, either. If so, they'd have put the seven slot grille right on it.
Ultimately, I think the grille is what did them in. If they would've just not used any kind of variation of slots and made it more like the old FJs, FCA might not have batted an eye. I don't think Jeep has really cared about other vehicles having similar dimensions, but they really don't want anyone even coming close to a slotted grille.
 
OP

jscherb

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #10
Ultimately, I think the grille is what did them in. If they would've just not used any kind of variation of slots and made it more like the old FJs, FCA might not have batted an eye. I don't think Jeep has really cared about other vehicles having similar dimensions, but they really don't want anyone even coming close to a slotted grille.
At least they changed the grille from the version they sell in India... the Roxor is a stripped-down variant of the Mahindra Thar:

VKThar3_zpse3pdqjbb.jpg
 
OP

DaltonGang

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #12
I think it is a good idea, but waaaaaay to expensive. Also, just put a funky looking hood and grill on it, to get around the lawsuit, then sell a fiberglass hood and grill, as aftermarket, that looks like a Jeep. Problem solved.
 
OP

jscherb

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #13
I think it is a good idea, but waaaaaay to expensive. Also, just put a funky looking hood and grill on it, to get around the lawsuit, then sell a fiberglass hood and grill, as aftermarket, that looks like a Jeep. Problem solved.
Mahindra already has a funky looking grille over in India, this Mahindra pickup as a CJ-style grille with a plastic overlay which I think was designed to "modernize" the look of the old CJ grille for better sales in India...

MahindraTruck1_zpsh2cnpzse.jpg
 
OP

Spank

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #14
The new 2020 Roxor has a redesigned grille and I think they did an awesome job. It looks great and is phenomenally better than the old janky one, regardless of the Jeep lawsuit.
 
OP

Rufus

  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #15
I completely understand FCA wanting to protect their IP and also wanting to set a precedent.

HOWEVER, the Roxor seems to evoke the storied history of Jeep and might overall be a good thing for the brand. If I were FCA I might have had Roxor sign some licensing agreement for a nominal fee and a limited term subject to FCAs renewal option to help support the nostalgia. It’s not like it’s going to eat in to JL sales.

Separately though I did go on the Roxor configurator, thinking I might want to buy one as a summer runaround thing in town where you can actually get tags for an LSV and I was shocked by how pricey they are. Full decked out I think it cost maybe only $5k less than my JL Sport.
 

                           
























































Top