by FN Herstal SA and FN America LLC filed a trademark lawsuit against Sturm, Ruger and Company yesterday in US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina. They are contending that Ruger’s SFAR™ (Small Frame Automatic Rifle) violates their trademark for the FN SCAR® family of rifles and associated products. SCAR® stands for Special Operations Forces Combat/Capable Assault Rifle.
FN asserts that consumers will confuse the Ruger SFAR with their SCAR as they “are very similar or nearly identical in size, purpose, weight, feel, color, caliber, capacity, features, and even style to the firearms marketed and sold by FN for nearly fifteen (15) years under the SCAR Mark.” Moreover, they allege that since Ruger didn’t put “Ruger” in front of “SFAR” in their advertising nor put hypens between the letters it will pronounced as one word similar to that of the FN SCAR®.
As part of their complaint, they post pictures of Ruger’s SFAR™ and FN’s SCAR® as to how they are very similar in look and feel. On this, I have to disagree with the lawyers from FN. The Ruger product look very much the same as any other AR-10/AR-15 while the FN product have a much different and distinctive look about it. While FN argues that consumers will a) confuse the two products and b) think that the “SFAR” is endorsed or sponsored by FN.
FN’s complaint alleges four causes of action against Ruger. They include infringement of Federally-registered trademarks, unfair competition under the Lanham Act, violation of North Carolina’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and trademark infringement under NC common law. FN seeks a permanent injunction against the use of “SFAR”, the destruction of all materials including firearms within Ruger’s possession marked with SFAR™, disgorgement of any profits from the sale of the rifle by Ruger, and finally, triple damages.
Ruger has no official response on their website as of today to this lawsuit. As the suit was filed yesterday, it is also too soon for a response in court.
So that you may view the exhibits contained in the complaint, I have embedded it below:
gov.uscourts.ncmd_.98070.1.0
Interesting, and on the money, from what little I know.
FN should take it as a compliment. I wish firearms manufacturers would quit “eating our own” and spend the money on promoting firearms rights. So, tell the Belgies to pack sand!
Bullshit.
This suit might be useful publicity for both companies, but no way does Ruger infringe.
The SCAR (one syllable) is well established, and it has a look and feel VERY different from the SFAR (“s-far”).
I own one of these, shopped a while, and I was at no point confused, neither about the rifles, nor about who makes which.
Also, the price points were not confusing in the least either.
Ruger needs to ask for atty fees and costs.
I just did a quick image search, not owning either, and can’t believe that anyone would ever claim that they look similar. The SFAR looks just like an AR, as mentioned above. The SCAR reminds me much more of a FAL or some of the other European battle rifles.
Time to boycott FN