Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: nht91-1.37

DATE: February 11, 1991

FROM: Paul Jackson Rice -- Chief Counsel, NHTSA

TO: S.V. Kaaria

TITLE: None

ATTACHMT: Attached to letter dated 1-16-91 from Marvin A. Leach to S.V. Kaaria (OCC 5648); Also attached to letter dated 1-3-91 from S.V. Kaaria to NHTSA

TEXT:

Our Denver Regional Office has forwarded your letter of January 3, 1991, to this Office for reply. You are "the designer of the taillights placed near the rear window of passenger cars." In attempting to negotiate a settlement with vehicle manufacturers, you have been informed that because "elevated brake lights" are required by our agency, the government "should negotiate with me for 1% of replacement cost of these taillights." You have asked that we clarify our position in this matter.

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 requires that every passenger car manufactured on or after September 1, 1985, be equipped with a high-mounted stop lamp, mounted on the rear vertical centerline of the vehicle. The only requirement relating to design is that the lens have an effective projected luminous lens area of not less than 4 1/2 square inches, but the standard does not specify the shape of the lens. Within these parameters, manufacturers have located their lamps both inside and outside of the car, from the roof to the deck, and have equipped them with circular and rectangular lenses of varying sizes. Our standards are generally expressed in performance terms so that manufacturers have the freedom to design their vehicles in the manner most suited to them to meet the performance requirements, and so that a specification that appears to favor a proprietary device (e.g., mandating a specific design solution to a standard's requirements) is avoided.

Because of the latitude in design that Standard No. 108 affords, we do not regard the lamp as having any single inventor or designer. While it is possible that you have designed a lamp with some proprietary elements, your search for recovery is properly directed towards lamp and vehicle manufacturers. You have been ill-advised to seek recovery from the government, for you have no legal basis to do so.