A number of people here took a holier-than-thou attitude towards the leaked pictures being posted, saying it would cost GM untold millions of dollars or that it might affect the very decision for GM to go ahead with production. Because, you know, corporations make billion dollar decisions based on what happens on internet message boards (“What, you posted my pictures? Forget it then, I’m not making the car for you anymore. And you can go to bed without supper.”).

Six weeks later, has any of this doom and gloom come to pass? Seems to me that GM got more favourable press than even they expected, and things look good for the Camaro making it to production. Not exactly the disaster scenario predicted.

I’m not saying it was right or wrong for the pictures to show up, but those who said it was wrong mostly quoted the reasons the above (aside from the pure legalities of it all) and I never understood why. I almost seemed like many of those comments were aimed at sucking up to GM or certain members here for lord knows what reason.

Anyhow, I was just trying to put this in perspective for the next time something big leaks out and people starts ranting and raving that it’s the end of the world.

 

Interesting point of view. I just finished reading last week's autoextremist.com article that talks about this very subject and declares the print magazines as a dying media. The Internet is changing the way news get's published.

 

I may be one of those people you mentioned….

I don’t take this as a flame though….its your opinion….

I had nothing personal to gain by doing what the “insiders” were saying to do. No sucking up…

I looked at it in an ethical business point of view….

It was technically illegal and not in the best interest of GM.

While everything turned out perfectly anyway…who knows….those pictures could have been a bad thing….

Just when certain higher ups say something adamantly that is above my understanding of the car business there is probably a good reason for it. So of course I’ll take that side. Maybe it’s a maturity thing of mine.

 

It's very easy to make declarations when you have nothing at stake.

In my mind, this comes down to 'right versus wrong.'

Let me ask you something. If you found a wallet on the street, what would you do?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

The right answer is "you would return it with its contents......and if you did not know who it belonged to, you would return it to the police."

That's it.

No other right answer.

Now.......the pictures were marked "confidential." It was obvious that the pictures were leaked by someone who did not have the right to leak them. Therefore, they were stolen property.

Why is that so hard for you -- and a few others -- to understand?

You do not.....let me repeat that --- you do not understand all the issues behind those pictures. Therefore, do not act like you do.

 

My favorite was the threat of lawsuits.

By the time any papers would have been filed, the show would have come and gone and GM would have no case.

I found that insulting.

 

I suppose it's a little like Napster when they first came out. Everyone downloaded many, many songs. Say what you want about the record industry...thing is, people who worked hard on those songs and depend on them for a living didn't see a dime from those downloads. Some downloaders even claimed it was their right to take download songs for free.

Well, here we are with a similar situation. GM built and produced the car...why shouldn't they be able to determine what happens with it? Or pictures of the car that they OWN! Certainly it's in their best interest to promote the car, but within reason they should decide how they will go about doing it.

Stars is right...It's not just a legal issue, it's an ethical one.

 

I dunno if you are referring to me, but if so...I don't recall saying "millions of dollars". Maybe I did...but I don't think so.

The general principle is that if everyone gets to see an rough and unfinished product (which the leaked images were), they will make a judgment at that time on the rough prototype, and not give the finished prototype (which shapes the potential production version) an accurate review. This is the same reason (among others) that automakers camoflauge pre-production cars when testing.

The other problem that I explained before is that the car was to be unveiled worldwide at the Detroit auto show. Many people saw the rough prototype, and said "I won't even bother going to the auto show to see it." without realizing that it was indeed not quite what was at the autoshow. Some even said "it looks unfinished." No kidding? If that response was used as a basis, it sure could have determined an unwelcome outcome. A planned response can be measured, filtered and gauged. A unplanned response can be detrimental.

Furthermore and more importantly to this site, when GM tells us that they don't want us to allow their property on this site, we have no desire to be defiant. The legal issues if they were to be enacted wouldn't stop at the time that the car was unveiled. Granted, the chances of actual legal action being taken are very slim, but that is not the chance we care to take. If someone else wants to, that is fine. They can start a site called "stolengmsecrets.com" for all I care. Why not...a few years ago someone did one called blueovalnews.com and perpetuated the release and distribution of Ford's intellectual property. Anyone remember what happened?

Again, if you were referring to me...

 

Here's a scenario for you people who think just because you found something on the internet, it's yours to do with what you want.....

What would have happened if Kerkorkian (sp?) would have dumped ALL of his GM stock at once because he was PO'd because the LAW was broken and GM did nothing about it.

As a stock owner, he had every right......

 

Jason brings up a good point.

How many people have seen the "finished" pictures......and don't like what they see........then they go and see it in person.......and their opinion changes 180 degrees?

It comes down to right versus wrong.

 

With absolutely no idea what the ramifications would have been, I've always thought it would have been a coup d'etat for GM's marketing department.

 

Why would some sloppy "leak" on the internet be better than the actual unveiling in front of 1,000 members of the world's press?

Why would GM want to be "connected" to a sloppy sophmoric "leak" versus a lavish well produced unveiling?

 

If you were painting a picture to enter a contest, would it be fair to let the judges see it before you were done? If so what if they didnt like it because it was unfinished and were prejudice at the unveiling? It is ethics.

 

What he said.

 

Wrong.

Doesn't change the fact the you still committed a crime.

Be insulted some more.

 

Well after the release of the concept if GM wanted to they could sue Automobile Mag for using the stolen pics on their story. At the time the crime was commited they used stolen property used without consent by the owners. How would the release of a concept change those facts, or change that the fact that damage could have been caused by the release of the photos if they had a bad public reaction? It would have been like you gambling with someone elses money.