Re: REM R25 .243 TO SHOOT OR NOT
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ORD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not trying to "knit pick," but facts are facts whether you choose to accept them or not. Armalite holds a registered trademark on the AR-10 which makes the use of "AR-10" exclusive to Armalite and anyone who profits from the misuse of it to describe, advertise, promote, etc. any other type of .308 semi-auto rifle/carbine is doing so in violation of federal law!
The point is...how would you like it if you spent countless millions of dollars in product development to come up with a "DP425" widget, only to have some hack open a shop in his basement and, using your name, manufacture and sell his own version of the DP425 for less money, with inferior quality, etc., all while riding your coat tails right to the bank. Trademark, Patent, and Copyright protections exist for a reason.
With that said, I understand the practicality of describing a "group" or "class" of firearms with one simple, universal moniker which is largely where the "AR-10" gets misused to describe virtually any and every .308 or "large-caliber" AR-based rifle/carbine out there. The bigger problem is that half the time, when a person says AR-10, they don't mean AR-10, but something else that isn't compatible and it takes up more time and more bandwidth to figure out that they mean "insert name of other semi-auto .308 here." It is EASIER to say what you mean and mean what you say instead of misusing a term that only causes confusion and leads to a series of follow-ups like, well, which "AR-10" do you want...Armalite, DPMS/KAC, etc.? This is especially true since there is no mil spec, universal standard for the .308 semi-auto like there is for the AR-15, making it even more confusing to refer to something as an "AR-10" when you mean something else. </div></div>
And I understand what you are saying- however, the TRUE AR-10 has much more in common with the DPMS unit than the latest "AR-10". Further, Colt holds the trademark for AR-15; yet I'm sure you and everyone else will refer to just about any mil style semi-auto similar to an M4 or M16 as an "AR". And as we all know- just because it's an "AR-15" TYPE rifle does not mean it meets mil-spec, or even has the same gas system. Further, misusing a trademarked name to describe a product while not using that trademark for profit is NOT illegal. Key thing is it must be done to make a profit- I don't see anyone using the term to generalize a firearm making profit. Again, same goes for AR-15's- you will only ever find ONE maker of AR-15's. Does not stop anyone from referring to every bushmaster, dpms, noveske or whatever else as an "AR-15".
If it's good enough to bitch about "AR-10" being a misused trademark- I'd like to see you jump on everyone's ass who call's their M&P15 an "AR" or "AR-15".
Lastly- the argument that AR-15 is okay because there is a mil-spec standard (which does not apply to anything but a military weapon anyway), but AR-10 is not because they very in design doesn't really hold weight either. There are no less than three DIFFERENT designs of the AR-10 titled and trademarked as such. So in-fact, there is no set "standard" for AR-10 either. So they'd better be sure to say AR-10, AR-10A or AR-10B.
I think you're viewing this as if someone is referring to a Savage 110 as a Rem700- which I don't believe is a good way of viewing it. I'd rather view it as someone referring to their bolt gun which is based on the Rem700 design but may not have 700 on it anywhere as a 700. It's more of a term of reference for the design style and in that respect it is accurate. KAC, DPMS, Bushmaster and the like are not AR-10's, but they are designed directly from the AR pattern rifles.
Anyway, at this point we're really arguing points of view; but I do find it hypocritical to slam someone for misusing "AR-10" but not "AR-15"
