1972 Ford Econoline - Super Van on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford sued by Versata over alleged software trade secret theft

Automakers are routinely subject to intellectual property and patent disputes, whether over design similarities or pieces of tech. Ford is now facing a lawsuit for alleged IP theft over a piece of software from a company called Versata, and the business wants $1 billion from the Blue Oval for the violation. With such huge amount of money at stake, the legal situation is already getting complicated. According to The Detroit Free Press, Versata's software is designed to help automakers improve product development by making sure all of a car's countless components work together. The company and Ford had a contract for the system for many years, and they were negotiating an extension at the end of 2014. However, the deal fell through, and the Blue Oval ended the two business' arrangement. Making the legal situation especially tricky is that Ford developed and patented its own software for the same task. The automaker then filed a lawsuit in Michigan to have the court check whether the program violated Versata's IP, according to The Detroit Free Press. Later, the software company registered a lawsuit in Texas and alleged the Blue Oval stole proprietary code. Versata has asked for an injunction against Ford and restitution. "Ford's patented software does not use or infringe any Versata intellectual property and Versata has provided no basis for their claims against us," the automaker said in a statement to Autoblog. "We are confident that we will ultimately prevail in this case and we look forward to the opportunity to present our evidence at trial." With both sides in dispute, that leaves Ford pushing for a hearing in Michigan and Versata for Texas. According to The Detroit Free Press, it could be at least a year before a trial, if not longer. Of course in the meantime, the two sides could conceivably reach a settlement, and the whole issue would disappear.

Submit your questions for Autoblog Podcast #310 LIVE!

We record Autoblog Podcast #310 tonight, and you can drop us your questions and comments regarding the rest of the week's news via our Q&A module below. Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes if you haven't already done so, and if you want to take it all in live, tune in to our UStream (audio only) channel at 10:00 PM Eastern tonight.
Discussion Topics for Autoblog Podcast Episode #310
Buick GN and GNX will return

Ford F-150 extended cab struggles in IIHS small overlap test

Update: Ford issued a statement to Autoblog to clarify the results of the test and dispute the IIHS repair cost estimates. A quote from a Ford representative has been added to the story. See the full statement below the IIHS press release. Of all the vehicles undergoing crash tests this year, few will be as closely watched as the new 2015 Ford F-150. That's not only because it remains the top-selling vehicle in America year after year, but also because it features an aluminum body instead of steel. While the F-150 performed well in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety test, one factor prompted the institute to undertake a second round of testing that uncovered a problem. Like most full-size pickups, the F-150 is available in several cab styles: the regular two-door, the extended SuperCab and the four-door SuperCrew. The IIHS typically takes the most popular version of a particular model for testing, and in the Ford truck's case that meant the SuperCrew. The F-150 performed well in all the tests the IIHS put it through, including the small overlap test in which the vehicle is driven 40 miles per hour into a five-foot-tall barrier impacting the front left corner of the vehicle. Its overall performance in the tests earned the F-150 a Top Safety Pick rating, missing out on the higher Top Safety Pick + rating only because it doesn't have an automatic braking system. But how do the other versions of Ford's best-seller hold up? Given that even less popular versions of the F-150 still sell more than many other vehicles on the market, the IIHS put an extended cab through the same battery of tests. It performed comparably except in one area: the small overlap test. In that case, the extended cab model's steering column was pushed eight inches into the cabin (dangerously close to the crash test dummy's chest), the dummy's head missed the airbag almost entirely and hit the instrument panel, and the dummy's legs would risk sustaining "moderate" injuries. The reason for the disparity is that "Ford added structural elements to the crew cab's front frame to earn a good small overlap rating and a Top Safety Pick award but didn't do the same for the extended cab," according to the Institute's chief research officer David Zuby. "That shortchanges buyers who might pick the extended cab thinking it offers the same protection in this type of crash as the crew cab.