2006 Chrysler Town & Country Lwb Minivan 3.8l Touring on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Has Dodge stepped in it again with Scat Pack lawsuit?

Lawsuits are an unfortunate part of doing business in just about any industry, so the latest complaint filed by a California-based aftermarket firm against Chrysler would seem to be nothing more than business as usual. But this isn't the first time the two companies have sparred over this particular issue.
According to a report from Automotive News, the dispute revolves around the Scat Pack name that Chrysler first offered on the Charger, Coronet, Dart and Super Bee starting in 1968. Scat Enterprises, a manufacturer of crankshafts and other components for Dodges and other vehicles, sued Chrysler for using its name. A few years later the Scat Pack disappeared from the Dodge catalog.
Fast forward to August 2013 when Chrysler applied to register the Scat Pack name anew. The US Patent and Trademark Office turned down Chrysler's application, but the automaker proceeded anyway, unveiling new Scat Packs for the Challenger, Charger and Dart at last year's SEMA show.

2015 Chrysler 200 looks to put Pentastar's cars back on track [w/videos]

It's fair to say that Chrysler Corporation has been on a major perception upswing with its new products, but that rise has largely been centered around its trucks and utility vehicles - the car side has been somewhat left out. The outgoing 200 (previously skinned as the Sebring) never garnered any laurels, the Dart has suffered a rather cool reception both critically and in terms of sales, the second-gen 300 is a nice car yet it hasn't sold as well as its predecessor, and even the mighty SRT Viper has had its V10 bark muted by the less costly and multi-talented Chevrolet Corvette Stingray. Resurgent Chrysler could use a hit car, and the 2015 200 may just be it.
It looks great here under the lights at the Detroit Auto Show.
For one thing, it looks great here under the lights at the Detroit Auto Show. Eschewing today's oversized headlamp and grille trend, the sleek 200 (with a coefficient of drag of just .27) displays a 'four-door coupe' sensibility with a sense of style that the old 200 with its gawky greenhouse and forced details never did. The new 200's exterior may look a bit like a greatest hits compendium of other high-style cars (see also: Audi A7, Tesla Model S, etc.), but it doesn't come off as a pastiche, it's all well-integrated and organic all the same.

The problem with how automakers confront hacking threats

More than anyone, Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller are responsible for alerting Americans to the hacking perils awaiting them in their modern-day cars. In 2013, the pair of cyber-security researchers followed in the footsteps of academics at the University of Cal-San Diego and University of Washington, demonstrating it was possible to hack and control cars. Last summer, their research established which vehicles contained inherent security weaknesses. In recent weeks, their latest findings have underscored the far-reaching danger of automotive security breaches. From the comfort of his Pittsburgh home, Valasek exploited a flaw in the cellular connection of a Jeep Cherokee and commandeered control as Miller drove along a St. Louis highway. Remote access. No prior tampering with the vehicle. An industry's nightmare. As a result of their work, FCA US recalled 1.4 million cars, improving safety for millions of motorists. For now, Valasek and Miller are at the forefront of their profession. In a few months, they could be out of jobs. Rather than embrace the skills of software and security experts in confronting the unforeseen downside of connectivity in cars, automakers have been doing their best to stifle independent cyber-security research. Lost in the analysis of the Jeep Cherokee vulnerabilities is the possibility this could be the last study of its kind. In September or October, the U.S. Copyright Office will issue a key ruling that could prevent third-party researchers like Valasek and Miller from accessing the components they need to conduct experiments on vehicles. Researchers have asked for an exemption in the Digital Millennial Copyright Act that would preserve their right to analyze cars, but automakers have opposed that exemption, claiming the software that runs almost every conceivable vehicle function is proprietary. Further, their attorneys have argued the complexity of the software has evolved to a point where safety and security risks arise when third parties start monkeying with the code. Their message on cyber security is, as it has been for years, that they know their products better than anyone else and that it's dangerous for others to meddle with them. But in precise terms, the Jeep Cherokee problems show this is not the case. Valasek and Miller discovered the problem, a security hole in the Sprint cellular connection to the UConnect infotainment system, not industry insiders.