Introduction to the Legal Battle
In recent months, the automotive world has been gripped by a high-profile intellectual property lawsuit that pits a giant automaker against a boutique restoration company. The lawsuit, referred to as the “Vintage Broncos Ford lawsuit,” centers around Ford Motor Company’s claims against Vintage Broncos, now rebranded as Vintage Modern. This case has garnered considerable media attention for its legal implications and because it touches on the broader cultural significance of classic car restoration. At the core of this dispute is the iconic Ford Bronco, a model with a legacy deeply woven into American automotive history. Ford alleges that Vintage Modern infringes on its trademarks and trade dress, while Vintage Modern defends its work as homage and creative restoration. The outcome of this lawsuit could shape the future of aftermarket car customization and the rights of legacy automakers.
The Ford Bronco: A Legacy Reimagined
The Ford Bronco debuted in 1966 as a rugged, no-frills SUV designed to take off-road terrain confidently. Over the decades, the Bronco evolved into an emblem of adventure and Americana, especially its early models, which are now considered classics. After a hiatus, Ford revived the Bronco in 2021, tapping into the vehicle’s cult following and retro appeal. The new Bronco’s release was met with widespread enthusiasm and massive preorders, underscoring the brand’s enduring popularity. Ford has since invested heavily in protecting its Bronco trademark and brand identity, viewing it as central to its SUV portfolio. The new Bronco was also accompanied by a wide array of branded merchandise and licensing deals, further entrenching the Bronco’s status as a lifestyle brand. This commercial resurgence is key to understanding why Ford is aggressively pursuing legal action to protect what it sees as a valuable intellectual asset.
Who Is Vintage Modern (Formerly Vintage Broncos)?
Vintage Modern, known initially as Vintage Broncos, is a Colorado-based automotive company specializing in restoring and modernizing classic Ford Broncos from the 1966-1977 era. Chau Nguyen founded the company as a passion project and quickly gained popularity for its high-end, custom-built Broncos that marry vintage aesthetics with modern performance. The company gained traction through social media and word-of-mouth among car collectors and enthusiasts who admired the craftsmanship and attention to detail.
Vintage Modern’s business model involves sourcing old Bronco bodies and chassis, completely stripping them down, and rebuilding them with upgraded engines, suspensions, and interiors. The final product often costs upwards of $200,000 and is marketed to affluent buyers looking for a nostalgic yet functional vehicle. Despite rebranding to Vintage Modern in 2023, the company continued to use imagery and language closely associated with Ford’s Bronco brand—a central issue in the current legal dispute.
What Sparked the Lawsuit?
The legal friction between Ford and Vintage Modern ignited when Ford filed a lawsuit in late 2023, accusing the smaller company of trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition. Ford claims that Vintage Modern has used the “Bronco” name and design elements that are legally protected, misleading consumers into thinking that the custom vehicles are endorsed or manufactured by Ford itself.
Specifically, Ford argues that Vintage Modern’s marketing and visual cues too closely mimic the trade dress of both the original and revived Broncos. The lawsuit also raises concerns over consumer safety, alleging that buyers may wrongly assume the vehicles meet Ford’s engineering and safety standards. Ford is seeking injunctive relief to stop the sales and marketing of the modified cars, along with damages and the transfer of any domain names or social handles that misuse Ford trademarks.
Vintage Modern’s Legal Response
Vintage Modern has mounted a multi-pronged legal defense in response to the lawsuit. One of their primary arguments is restoring and modifying the original Ford Broncos, which were legally acquired and owned. Therefore, they contend they can resell them under fair use principles. Vintage Modern also argues that Ford abandoned the Bronco trademark for decades, particularly during the SUV’s hiatus from 1996 to 2021, which weakens Ford’s claim to exclusive rights.
Founder Chau Nguyen has publicly defended the company’s practices, emphasizing that their builds are unique interpretations rather than replicas. He asserts that the company does not mislead customers about Ford’s involvement and that buyers know they are purchasing custom restorations. Nguyen frames the dispute as a battle between creative entrepreneurs and corporate overreach, a sentiment echoed by many in the custom automotive world.
Trademark Law vs. Restoration Culture
At the heart of this lawsuit is the collision between intellectual property law and the culture of classic car restoration. Trademark law gives companies exclusive rights to specific names, logos, and design features that identify their products. However, restoration culture has long thrived on reusing, refurbishing, and sometimes reimagining old vehicles, often without corporate involvement or interference.
This case exemplifies the legal gray area between homage and infringement. While it’s legal to restore and sell old cars, using original branding or similar design language can be deemed infringing if it causes brand confusion. Several automotive lawsuits in the past, including those involving Porsche and Ferrari body kits, have set precedents that will likely influence this case. As courts grapple with modern branding practices, this lawsuit may redefine what constitutes fair use in automotive customization.
Industry Impact and Precedents
The “Vintage Broncos Ford lawsuit” implications extend far beyond the two companies involved. A ruling in Ford’s favor could establish stricter limits on how restoration shops can reference or replicate legacy designs, potentially chilling creativity and innovation in the sector. It could also set a precedent for other automakers to take legal action against aftermarket businesses, especially as older vehicle models gain new life through modern restorations.
Conversely, if the court sides with Vintage Modern, it may embolden custom builders and restoration companies to push creative boundaries with less fear of litigation. Such an outcome could foster a more vibrant restoration market and complicate brand protection for OEMs. Either way, the result of this case is likely to reshape the business landscape for vintage vehicle restorers, especially those working with iconic brands like Ford, Jeep, and Chevrolet.
Public Reaction and Media Buzz
The lawsuit has ignited passionate debates within automotive forums, social media platforms, and YouTube car channels. While some enthusiasts sympathize with Ford’s right to protect its brand, many express concern that such legal action undermines the spirit of classic car culture. Popular automotive influencers and publications have weighed in, highlighting the craftsmanship of Vintage Modern and questioning Ford’s motives.
Media coverage has largely been balanced, with outlets like Jalopnik, Road & Track, and MotorTrend providing legal insights alongside cultural context. The lawsuit has also caught the eye of legal analysts who see it as a landmark case in IP enforcement in the auto industry. Hashtags like #SaveTheBroncos and #LetThemBuild have gained traction, illustrating the cultural and emotional investment of the broader car-loving community.
Possible Outcomes and What’s Next
Several scenarios could unfold from this lawsuit. If the court grants Ford’s request for an injunction, Vintage Modern may be forced to cease certain marketing practices, rebrand again, or even halt operations. Monetary damages or forced asset transfers could also cripple the boutique business. On the other hand, if Vintage Modern prevails, it could secure a legal green light to continue its operations without fear of future litigation.
A settlement remains a distinct possibility, particularly if both parties wish to avoid protracted litigation. Such a resolution might involve licensing agreements, more explicit branding guidelines, or modifications to marketing language. Regardless of the outcome, the case will likely influence how OEMs and custom shops coexist in an increasingly brand-sensitive market.
Conclusion
The “Vintage Broncos Ford lawsuit” represents more than a simple trademark dispute—it symbolizes the tension between corporate brand control and independent automotive creativity. As the legal proceedings unfold, the outcome will reverberate across restoration garages, car shows, and corporate boardrooms. Whether it results in stricter IP enforcement or a reaffirmation of creative rights, this case will help define the next chapter in the evolving relationship between automakers and the passionate community that reveres their classic machines.
Do Read: DuPont Lawsuit 2025 – PFAS Legal Battles, Settlements & Environmental Fallout
