1963 Pro Street Ford Econoline Pickup on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350 to start at $47,870 [UPDATE]

UPDATE: After reaching out to Ford, we've been told by spokesman Said Deep that while the Blue Oval hasn't formally announced pricing for the GT350/GT350R, the document obtained by Mustang6G is accurate. Look for a second post when Ford makes its formal announcement at a later date. Ladies and gents, the Ford Mustang Shelby GT350 will be something of a bargain. Mustang6G has a leaked pricing sheet that indicates the base model will start at just $47,870, while the track-oriented R adds $13,500 to that price. Neither figure includes an $825 destination charge. That means that the high-performance Mustang will undercut, well, a lot of stuff. The GT350R is nearly $11,000 less than a Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 and is $2,830 less than a base BMW M4. The standard GT350, meanwhile, slots below the base Chevrolet Corvette by $7,130, while the price should even be within the reach of some Camaro SS 1LE consumers. In short, the GT350 and GT350R should appeal to a lot of people based purely on price alone. With the previous leak on options pricing, figuring out the cost of your ideal GT350 requires nothing more than some simple addition. While a leaked document such as this is often met with an initial degree of skepticism, Mustang6G reports that the prices are real and are showing up within the Ford dealer system. Naturally, we've reached out to Ford in an attempt to confirm this report. Should they get back to us, we'll be sure to update this story. See Ford's comment up top. Until then, head into Comments and let us know what you think of the starting prices for the GT350 and GT350R.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.

Court puts kibosh on apartheid lawsuit against Ford, Daimler

Ford and Daimler have scored a major victory in a long-running lawsuit filed in US federal court by unnamed South African nationals. The suit alleges that both manufacturers and their subsidiaries sold their vehicles to the South African military, despite knowing that they'd be involved in violently putting down anti-apartheid protesters.
According to Reuters, South African plaintiffs filed the case under the 223-year-old Alien Torts Statute, a law which allows foreign nationals to file charges in US courts for perceived breaches of what was originally international law, but now more closely relates to violations of human rights.
And while the case - which also involves computer manufacturer IBM - has been tied up in federal courts for years, a recent case from the Supreme Court struck down a similar suit against Royal Dutch Petroleum (Shell), arguing that the ATS doesn't apply to corporations or to conduct if it occurred outside the US. In short, the law applies to individuals, but not corporations like Ford or Daimler. A US appeals court ruled that the conditions apply in this case, potentially drawing this long-running saga to a close, as the defendants will now be allowed to request that the case be dismissed in district court.