Ferrari - a lawyer's best friend?

Originally posted by SlateGray
No one expects you or any of the other Ferrari fans to see anything but the company line on this so you opinion is basically valueless on this question.

Up yours, Slatey. My opinion has at least an equal weight to yours as someone who sides against Ferrari on all issues.

And, by the way, an "altered Ferrari," by its very definition, is no longer a "Ferrari."

Originally posted by SlateGray
It is in fact a Ferrari car that has been altered.

That is a fact indeed. A Ferrari has been altered. The dispute is whether it is still a Ferrari. Or not.

Originally posted by SlateGray


Well if he is calling it a stretched Ferrari as opposed to a Ferrari 360 then his description is accurate, I would agree with you if he was calling it a Ferrari 360 without mention of the alterations that have been made to the Ferrari. It is an altered Ferrari. That is accurate.

No one expects you or any of the other Ferrari fans to see anything but the company line on this so you opinion is basically valueless on this question.

Quite a rational first paragraph, and then you seem to demonstrate quite the opposite quality by the time you reached the second paragraph.

Originally posted by se7en_24

I don't think so (well I didn't hear anything about it), in fact wasn't he one of the people Ferrari offered an Enzo to buy new?

Yea a black enzo if i remember correctly Jay K is his name i think

From the website:
"Not only will the Stretched Ferrari F1 360 be the world’s longest Ferrari and the worlds Stretched Ferrari F1 360 it will be the most technically advanced limo built to date "

It's nice seeing the longest Ferrari is not made by Ferrari themselves

Originally posted by Scudetto

My opinion has at least an equal weight to yours as someone who sides against Ferrari on all issues.

I would agree that your opinion on this matter is just as valueless as "someone who sides against Ferrari on all issues"

For the life of me, and I have been reading this board for 8 years, I cannot think on any poster that sides against Ferrari on all issues. Personally I support some of stuff that Ferrari does, not many things but some.

Slate, if you were a builder and built a really nice, beautifully planned and executed house, then some cowboy built a couple of tasteless, crappy extensions, would you be happy to have a big sign in the garden saying Built by Slategray?

Originally posted by se7en_24
Last time I looked, US law didn't apply in the UK (yet).

Yeah it does, we just bought the Magna Carta

Originally posted by SlateGray


Just a dig at a half wit Ferrari zealot

In 7 years I've never reported a post until today. You've really outted yourself to be quite the asshole. Nice.

Originally posted by Group B
Slate, if you were a builder and built a really nice, beautifully planned and executed house, then some cowboy built a couple of tasteless, crappy extensions, would you be happy to have a big sign in the garden saying Built by Slategray?

Who is Slategray?;)

As long as the builder said it was an "altered" or "changed" or "modified" Slategray building then I would be fine with it. If he or she tried to pass it off as a Slategray original that would be a different story.

Looks as good as any Ferrari i've seen, so i don't know what they're bitching about. The fact that it's longer should make it more appealing to the types who would want a Ferrari in the first place. Sorry.

Originally posted by chrisj
Looks as good as any Ferrari i've seen, so i don't know what they're bitching about. The fact that it's longer should make it more appealing to the types who would want a Ferrari in the first place. Sorry.

Absolutely - not everybody likes racing cars, and if they're not your cup of tea then so be it.

Looking around there seems to be a few Ferrari's that have been stretched.

http://www.limobob.com

That guy has a few that are possibly fakes but carry Ferrari badges like this F40. Now I assume thats worse then the guy in the opening post.
He also seems to have E-type jag, porsche 911, vette and even a boeing...

Have Ferrari done anything about those? Has any other car company done anything about them?

Mr Cawley should call his business "Farreri Limo" and put some Lamborghini badges onto the mess he made out of that innocent Modena.

Should be enough to keep the Maranello lawyers at bay.

Originally posted by MichaelPM
Have Ferrari done anything about those? Has any other car company done anything about them?

For Ferrari to do something about, they first must know about it. Why not email the link to Maranello and see what happens? As for the others, it's up to them to choose how strictly they seek to enforce their trademarks. And whether they choose to or not has no bearing on Ferrari's right or ability to do so.

This is a somewhat unique case to be brought. In essence, what makes a Ferrari not a Ferrari. For example, what if someone was to add a higher rear wing to a Ferrari. Would the fact that it has been altered make it still a Ferrari? What about a lowered Ferrari with new wheels? Or merely new wheels? How about a new non Ferrari paint job? Why is Ferrari not sueing the likes of Novitec Rosso, who produce modded Ferrari's for the public?

In essense, it is all bollocks. Ferrari are letting it be known to the general public that they don't like this car. End of discussion.

Originally posted by Scudetto


For Ferrari to do something about, they first must know about it. Why not email the link to Maranello and see what happens? As for the others, it's up to them to choose how strictly they seek to enforce their trademarks. And whether they choose to or not has no bearing on Ferrari's right or ability to do so.

I just cant be bothered because it really dosent matter to me at all.

Somehow I doubt Ferrari can do much about British modified/replica Ferrari's seeing as theres alot of kit cars you can buy and badge as Ferrari's. A Ferrari badge on a 360 modena thats got 3 metres more wheelbade then stock somehow seems trivial when you compare it to people buying a £6000 kit to turn a front wheel drive Peugeot 406 into a Ferrari 360.

Originally posted by JForce
If he uses the fact that it's a Ferrari to make money then he's infringing on their trademarks.

If you were to purchase the car and put on different wheels, and you sell it for $1 more than you bought it for, would that infringe on the trademark?

By my limited understanding, if you purchase an item with no receivership contract you can do whatever you want (airplanes often use receivership contracts - I think Ferrari uses these on their high-end cars, I am not certain). I believe The only thing you can't do is mis-represent the item (put a BMW emblem on a KIA and call it a BMW). If he tries to sell this vehicle (or rent it) - as a 100% Ferrari item, he would be breaking the law. But by simply having the emblem, I believe that is well within the law (unless there is a contract).

Originally posted by JForce
Besides, he should be locked away for doing that a Ferrari in the first place

I think we can all agree on this.

Either way - I don't think this Ferrari would get by Charlie Whiting.

Originally posted by MichaelPM
Somehow I doubt Ferrari can do much about British modified/replica Ferrari's seeing as theres alot of kit cars you can buy and badge as Ferrari's. A Ferrari badge on a 360 modena thats got 3 metres more wheelbade then stock somehow seems trivial when you compare it to people buying a £6000 kit to turn a front wheel drive Peugeot 406 into a Ferrari 360.

Just because similar or worse things are being done does not make this one right. I suspect the limo guy is trying to make a big deal about it in the press to gather sympathy and make Ferrari look like the bad guys.

It is no longer a Ferrari. Fundamental elements of the product have been changed that compromise what the company hold out the product to be capable of and look like. Ferrari does not make limos therefore it cannot be a Ferrari.

Originally posted by MichaelPM
Somehow I doubt Ferrari can do much about British modified/replica Ferrari's seeing as theres alot of kit cars you can buy and badge as Ferrari's. A Ferrari badge on a 360 modena thats got 3 metres more wheelbade then stock somehow seems trivial when you compare it to people buying a £6000 kit to turn a front wheel drive Peugeot 406 into a Ferrari 360.

It does seem like Ferrari are pursuing a rather trivial matter, but the point is that the theory behind their doing so is not unsound. Apparently, the judge agreed since the modder in question was already compelled to remove the badging within 14 days.

I do, however, wonder why Ferrari would take such a small fish to task over a recently defunct model when one can acquire fairly good quality replicas of such halo models as the 250GTO. To me, that'd be the bigger detriment to the brand, though I don't know off hand if there's a distinction in the law that would render pursuit of replicas unviable.

If they're willing to go after this bloke to this extent, they'd probably sue me for defamation if they knew what I've said about my Mondial.

I think all stretch limos are stupid, but they did put a lot of effort into it, did it well, and produced something new. A bit more here

It's a temptation for companies to take their trademark too seriously when it's not counterfeiting or anything serious. Ferrari may be right in law, but a bit up their own a*se about it with this one. According to the article they have told him he mustn't make another one, I'm a bit surprised if that's enforcable in law.

Originally posted by undersquare
A bit more here

The car, which is rented out for £700 an hour, was created by Dan and former McLaren carbon fibre expert Chris Wright.

There you go. Once you get a McLaren guy involved, all bets with Ferrari are off.

I do agree with the reasoning behind it as a sole case but its cast into doubt by many other examples of such non-Ferrari. It is almost like Ferrari are making a personal attack on this guy instead of the practice they claim to oppose.

Originally posted by Scudetto


It does seem like Ferrari are pursuing a rather trivial matter, but the point is that the theory behind their doing so is not unsound. Apparently, the judge agreed since the modder in question was already compelled to remove the badging within 14 days.

Don't think it's gone before a judge as yet, the article reads to me ("facing" legal action) that he has had a letter before action asking him to take the logos off in the next fortnight or else.

Originally posted by ensign14

Don't think it's gone before a judge as yet, the article reads to me ("facing" legal action) that he has had a letter before action asking him to take the logos off in the next fortnight or else.

Yes, I think you're right. I read his "precedent" quote and read too much into it.

Wouldn't it be a Ferrari modified by XYZ company?

It actually has something rather good about it - they did not have to worry about the driveshaft. The throttle might be a bit of an issue - is it fly by wire? If so, even better. I wonder also whether the Limo company has improved the turning circle?

This reminds me of a transmission company some years ago in England, their owner had a Silver Shadow Rolls Royce, and he squeezed a V12 merlin engine into the car. The bonnet stretched forward about one foot, and the company put in a transmission that kept everything working. The car looked almost standard, and maybe even looked a bit better than standard with its longer bonnet. The first merlins could achieve over 1,000 hp from their 27 litres, and Spitfires in middle of the Euro war had over 1400 hp capable motors. Rolls Royce got quite upset about this (phantom?) Rolls Royce, because they were getting numerous telephone calls from Europe, where mostly Ferrari drivers on the Autobahns were ringing Rolls Royce, and trying to put in orders for the new fast model. Rolls Royce didn't like having to say that there wasn't going to be such a fast model coming. And no Sir, or was it Von? - there's not going to be a new fast Bentley either Sir. And then they'd have to listen to how the Silver Shadow had drawn up to them at 160 MPH, sat there for a short perusal, and then blasted right away and just kept on going and going away and then it was altogether gone! The Merlin equipped Silver Shadow eventually got onto the cover of Autocar. But Rolls Royce never sued - and the car was afterall, mostly all Rolls Royce.

I think they would be safe to advertise this oddity thusly.

Modified: Ferrari 360 Modena

3.6 litre 400bhp V8

Guinness world record certified “fastest limousine”

I can see where Ferrari would be concerned on a safety front combined with the negative publicity they would potentially receive if the super limo went off at 250 kph.

Originally posted by SlateGray
I think they would be safe to advertise this oddity thusly.

Modified: Ferrari 360 Modena

3.6 litre 400bhp V8

Guinness world record certified “fastest limousine”

I can see where Ferrari would be concerned on a safety front combined with the potential negative publicity they would potentially receive if the super limo went off at 250 kph.

Or worse, it getting stuck on a speed hump!

Originally posted by Melbourne Park


Or worse, it getting stuck on a speed hump!

Do they actually run this thing at any elevated speeds with seven members of the paying public in the passenger seats?

Originally posted by SlateGray


Do they actually run this thing at any elevated speeds with seven members of the paying public in the passenger seats?

For all I know, its a photoshop mock-up, which would be very smart marketing, and Ferrari Lawyers would be assisting that if its true! I could not imagine one being able to turn a right hand corner, or cross over a speed hump - IMO such a low car would need a short wheelbase to negotiate a speed hump.

Originally posted by Tigershark
"Lawyers say that since Mr Cawley cut the 360 Modena in half and inserted a 3m (9.5ft) section of hand-built carbon fibre, the car is no longer a Ferrari ."

Perhaps, but the badges and the '360 Modena'-name still are, which is why he had to remove them.

The car is actually 'a longer Ferrari'

Ferrari can feck off

They called this a Ferrari after all

Originally posted by undersquare
I think all stretch limos are stupid, but they did put a lot of effort into it, did it well, and produced something new. A bit more here

It's a temptation for companies to take their trademark too seriously when it's not counterfeiting or anything serious. Ferrari may be right in law, but a bit up their own a*se about it with this one. According to the article they have told him he mustn't make another one, I'm a bit surprised if that's enforcable in law.

Dan, 36, who runs Style Limousines in Cheadle, Manchester, has been given 14 days to remove all prancing horse badges, Ferrari names and 360 Modena symbols. He has also been told never to refer to the car as a Ferrari again, and never to modify another of their cars.

Dan is now taking legal advice to fight the supercar giant. He said: "What kind of precedent does it set when you can't do what you like with your own property?

Yes, Ferrari has made one bad mistake here, IMO, when they tell him that he "mustn't make another one". Because then they give him right in "What kind of precedent does it set when you can't do what you like with your own property?" They should have left it with "remove all prancing horse badges, Ferrari names and 360 Modena symbols and never refer to the car as a Ferrari again".

Whatever.

So if I bought a Ferrari engine, and put that in my boat, would that be OK? And could I put non Ferrari wheels onto my Ferrari? And could I use my Ferrari labeled wheels on my modified Vette? And could I also put Ferrari wheels onto my limousine?

And how about a stickers on the car? Could I put a Ferrari stick on label that I bought at the Ferrari shop (yes there is one only 5 minutes walk from my house - its always full of Ferraris being serviced too, and they sell all sorts of Ferrari stuff ) - could I stick some of their Ferrari stickers on my limousine? Could I wear my Ferrari racing suit when I drive my Corvette? And also, when I driver my limousine? Is a Ferrari phone OK to use in a limousine? Is a TV aerial permitted on a Ferrari? Could I raise my Ferrari car with longer springs and shockers - maybe adjustable shockers too - so that its nice and high up in the air because I have a rough road to traverse to my farm house?

And can I use my Macbook in my Ferrari? And what about those Ferrari notebooks, that are bright glossy red - they have Ferrari all over them, but they don't even look like they are an automobile. Can I use them in my limousine, and even maybe, leave them on the dashboard of my limousine?

Yes, yes ,yes and yes!

Can I buy this or should I email Luca?

It may have been sparked by his registering his domain ferrarilimo.co.uk ... he used a trademark in a domain name, that is generally fought hard.

Originally posted by Stibbles


The car is actually 'a longer Ferrari'

Kind of reminds me of that geezer who built a custom car, put a Rolls Royce V12 aircraft engine in it and slapped a RR grille on it. He got sued by RR for trademark infrigment.





I also have a friend who once put a 350 small block into a Volvo 240. He sold it, made a profit, and no, Volvo didn't come after him despite the "Volvo" and "240" badges was still present on the car, even though Volvo never made 240's with 350's in them. Makes one wonder, doesn't it.

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
So if I bought a Ferrari engine, and put that in my boat

So long as you don't call it a "Ferrari boat" I do not see why you should have a problem.

That is entirely against the point though. Ferrari were not seeking to stop this man from making a stretch limousine with Ferrari parts...they are seeking to stop this man using the name "Ferrari" as part of the car's title and in his marketing.

I am not sure what so many people find so hard to grasp about this...and in your case I presume to are simply being disingenuous, as - although I don't always agree with what you post - you do usually seem to have a reasonable quantity of grey matter.

Originally posted by VresiBerba
Kind of reminds me of that geezer who built a custom car, put a Rolls Royce V12 aircraft engine in it and slapped a RR grille on it. He got sued by RR for trademark infrigment.





I also have a friend who once put a 350 small block into a Volvo 240. He sold it, made a profit, and no, Volvo didn't come after him despite the "Volvo" and "240" badges was still present on the car, even though Volvo never made 240's with 350's in them. Makes one wonder, doesn't it.

jesus - any idea how fast it could reach? And how many day's notice it required if you wished to turn a corner?

Originally posted by Scudetto
And, by the way, an "altered Ferrari," by its very definition, is no longer a "Ferrari."

So Stefan Eriksson's Enzo siezed to be a Ferrari the second he smashed it?

Originally posted by Perigee
jesus - any idea how fast it could reach? And how many day's notice it required if you wished to turn a corner?

I just remember it vaguely, it's after all like 20 years ago I read the article in a magazine. But he said something like that when he put in second gear, he passed the Porsche's. When he put in third gear, he passed the Ferrari's

Originally posted by Perigee
I am not sure what so many people find so hard to grasp about this...and in your case I presume to are simply being disingenuous, as - although I don't always agree with what you post - you do usually seem to have a reasonable quantity of grey matter.

I think if someone did that to my car, i'd sue too! It is a desecration, and the most ridiculous limo of all time. How would you get into the middle of the thing - crawl on your stomach? And the view from it would be of mini minors looking like SUVs - because that's how mini minors look from a Ferrari.

But the Ferrari service place does have a shop front full of Ferrari stuff - IMO Ferrari is prepared to profit from all sorts of Ferrari labeled junk, but they get offended for someone modifying their vehicles. If I was a Ferrari employ though - I'd tell the lawyers to have a go at them. It is a desecration, and a stupid limo. But if he's just a small show, then that makes me offended too - because he's not harming Ferrari's business reputation at all IMO. I'd get my lawyers to threaten him, and let him know not to do it again. He'd probably be quite greatfull.

The perverseness of this is he wants to make mileage out of the success and allure of the very BRAND that he does not think the CREATORS have a right protect. :

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
I think if someone did that to my car, i'd sue too! It is a desecration, and the most ridiculous limo of all time. How would you get into the middle of the thing - crawl on your stomach? And the view from it would be of mini minors looking like SUVs - because that's how mini minors look from a Ferrari.

But the Ferrari service place does have a shop front full of Ferrari stuff - IMO Ferrari is prepared to profit from all sorts of Ferrari labeled junk, but they get offended for someone modifying their vehicles. If I was a Ferrari employ though - I'd tell the lawyers to have a go at them. It is a desecration, and a stupid limo. But if he's just a small show, then that makes me offended too - because he's not harming Ferrari's business reputation at all IMO. I'd get my lawyers to threaten him, and let him know not to do it again. He'd probably be quite greatfull.

But MP that is exactly what has happened he has been given 14 days to remove the badges and references to the brand on his websites and marketing material. No one has sued him yet. Ferrari are doing exactly what you are asking them to do.
They have no problem with him doing whatever he wants with his property, they are not asking him to return the car to its original state, or send it back to the company. They are just saying once you do that, do not TRADE with the Ferrari BRAND and trademarks, which is clearly what he is doing.

And can I use my Macbook in my Ferrari?

There's a pun to be made somewhere in there, but I can't quite get one out :-)

Originally posted by VresiBerba
So Stefan Eriksson's Enzo siezed to be a Ferrari the second he smashed it?

Gee, that's one of those deep questions like "does life begin at conception or viability?" It might be more a religious issue than a scientific one.

Originally posted by LeD
OK,OK - you lawyers got to me - I promise to change the badge. Is this alright???

Originally posted by VresiBerba
So Stefan Eriksson's Enzo siezed to be a Ferrari the second he smashed it?

The word is 'ceased', and if you're unable to differentiate between the two circumstances then any explanation would clearly be some way over your head.

Originally posted by Scoots
It may have been sparked by his registering his domain ferrarilimo.co.uk ... he used a trademark in a domain name, that is generally fought hard.

I suspect the word "ferrarilimo" is not a Ferrari trademark.