Jump to content


Photo

Ferrari - a lawyer's best friend?


  • Please log in to reply
271 replies to this topic

#251 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 08 March 2008 - 10:06

Originally posted by Scudetto


Big bold letters doesn't make your argument any less idiotic. Color it any way you like, but if you cut a car down the ****ing middle and at over 3 meters worth of shit the manufacturer neither authorized or contemplated, you're doing quite a bit more than adding parts.

:up:

Advertisement

#252 McGuire

McGuire
  • Member

  • 9,218 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 08 March 2008 - 12:32

Originally posted by Josta


So do you think that Ford should take out law suits against boy racers who add spoilers etc?


That is another matter altogether. The boy racer is not in business trading on Ford's brand. Unlike the stretch limo builder, he has modified his Ford for his own personal use.

Now... if you want to examine the companies that manufacture the boy racer parts: they must tread a careful path at times. So you will often see disclaimers in their printed material like "Ford and Focus etc. are registered trademarks of Ford Motor Co" and "these parts are not manufactured or warranted for any particular purpose." Ford wants everyone to know that these are NOT Ford parts and Ford cannot warrant their suitability for any purpose, nor do they want these components to reflect negatively upon Ford's brand.

One company recently introduced a complete reproduction steel body shell for the 1967 Mustang. This required negotiating an agreement with Ford's licensing department, for whether you install Ford badges or call it a Mustang, that is a Mustang body and its look and shape are the property of Ford. Also, Ford requires the company to call the body a "Mustang replacement body shell." Mustang is one of Ford's most historic and valuable brands and Ford is going to protect it like a mother lion.

This is in part where the stretch-limo builder got sideways with Ferrari. He is clearly attempting to trade on Ferrari's trademarks and brand images to make himself a buck, while distorting and damaging the brand image at the same time.

#253 pUs

pUs
  • Member

  • 2,543 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 08 March 2008 - 12:51

Originally posted by VresiBerba
What the hell is the matter with you, did I say the limo is a genuine Ferrari? I said that the limo is a genuine Ferrari -

WITH ADDED PARTS!


Really, what is the deal with everything you write in Ferrari-related threads? Always angry, on the edge foruming, the appropriate font size added for extra apperance thus the last thenth of a second this thread needed was found. EXCELLENT :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :smoking:

#254 McGuire

McGuire
  • Member

  • 9,218 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 08 March 2008 - 12:52

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
There's lots of old XJ Jags that have small block Chevi engines in them - they are better cars by removing a bad XK engine. Of course, no one knows so its not a problem.


Interesting you should mention these, have built a few of them myself. And of course, once you buy it Jaguar has absolutely no say in what kind of engine you put in a Jaguar. It's your car. However, the largest company making kits and components for this swap once found itself in hot water with the mother ship. Apparently the company went a little too far in its advertising claims as to how much the Chevy conversions improved the car vs. what a turgid lump it was with the original engine. So far a while there, you could read this company's full-page ads without encountering the words "Jaguar," "XK6," or any of the manufacturer's brand properties. What the kits and parts were actually for had to be implied, which was rather amusing at times.

#255 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,097 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 08 March 2008 - 13:11

Originally posted by McGuire


Interesting you should mention these, have built a few of them myself. And of course, once you buy it Jaguar has absolutely no say in what kind of engine you put in a Jaguar. It's your car. However, the largest company making kits and components for this swap once found itself in hot water with the mother ship. Apparently the company went a little too far in its advertising claims as to how much the Chevy conversions improved the car vs. what a turgid lump it was with the original engine. So far a while there, you could read this company's full-page ads without encountering the words "Jaguar," "XK6," or any of the manufacturer's brand properties. What the kits and parts were actually for had to be implied, which was rather amusing at times.


I love it! :lol:

i also liked the XK engine ... when they are running sweet. Of course, a small block done up right can be awesome. And those XK diffs could handle the power and torque. Those days are well gone though.

#256 VresiBerba

VresiBerba
  • Member

  • 8,951 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 08 March 2008 - 20:46

Originally posted by Scudetto
Big bold letters doesn't make your argument any less idiotic.

No it doesn't, and it sure as hell doesn't make you understand either. Listen Scudo, I never said that the Limo was a Ferrari, I said it was an altered Ferrari. Can you understand the difference between "a Ferrari" and adding a suffix or a prefix to "a Ferrari"?

FERRARI 360 MODENA <- a genuine Ferrari
FERRARI 360 MODENA WITH ADDED PARTS :rolleyes: Make one modification to your Ferrari, be it anything and it completely invalidates the name "Ferrari"!? Don't you understand how ridiculous that is?

#257 VresiBerba

VresiBerba
  • Member

  • 8,951 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 08 March 2008 - 20:48

Originally posted by pUs
Really

Yeah :rolleyes:

#258 Scudetto

Scudetto
  • Member

  • 8,047 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 08 March 2008 - 21:41

Originally posted by VresiBerba
No it doesn't, and it sure as hell doesn't make you understand either. Listen Scudo, I never said that the Limo was a Ferrari, I said it was an altered Ferrari. Can you understand the difference between "a Ferrari" and adding a suffix or a prefix to "a Ferrari"?

FERRARI 360 MODENA <- a genuine Ferrari
FERRARI 360 MODENA WITH ADDED PARTS :rolleyes: Make one modification to your Ferrari, be it anything and it completely invalidates the name "Ferrari"!? Don't you understand how ridiculous that is?


Let's clear up a very basic misunderstanding that you appear to insist on hanging your hat on. I did NOT say any minor alteration to a Ferrari renders it a Ferrari no longer. That is your interpretation of a phrase I used with SlateGray in specific reference to this car. In fact, I said in subsequent posts that modifications that do not change the basic character of the car wouldn't be problematic.

Insofar as you acknowledge that the subject vehicle is not a Ferrari, but and "altered Ferrari," do you think that the car can legitimately carry Ferrari badging? I've already said that so long as the guy used it for personal reasons, I see no problem with keeping the emblems. But if he uses for commercial reasons, using the Ferrari brand identify the car or market the limo, then Ferrari's got viable commerical, brand image and liability concerns.

#259 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 March 2008 - 21:45

Originally posted by Scudetto


Let's clear up a very basic misunderstanding that you appear to insist on hanging your hat on. I did NOT say any minor alteration to a Ferrari renders it a Ferrari no longer. That is your interpretation of a phrase I used with SlateGray in specific reference to this car. In fact, I said in subsequent posts that modifications that do not change the basic character of the car wouldn't be problematic.

Insofar as you acknowledge that the subject vehicle is not a Ferrari, but and "altered Ferrari," do you think that the car can legitimately carry Ferrari badging? I've already said that so long as the guy used it for personal reasons, I see no problem with keeping the emblems. But if he uses for commercial reasons, using the Ferrari brand identify the car or market the limo, then Ferrari's got viable commerical, brand image and liability concerns.


Funny, this seems to be carrying the Ferrari badge, despite being heavily modified and used for commercial purposes.

Advertisement

#260 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 08 March 2008 - 21:49

Originally posted by Josta


Funny, this seems to be carrying the Ferrari badge, despite being heavily modified and used for commercial purposes.

Get real. :rolleyes:

#261 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,933 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 08 March 2008 - 21:51

Originally posted by pUs


Really, what is the deal with everything you write in Ferrari-related threads? Always angry, on the edge foruming, the appropriate font size added for extra apperance thus the last thenth of a second this thread needed was found. EXCELLENT :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :smoking:




:up:

However in terms of Ferrari- a lawyer's best friend, we must look deeper into F1's political history, I think guys like Bailistere(forget his correct spelling) the guy before Max Mosely, he was like the Godfather, I think guys like him had more Lawyer friends. Formula One has contributed to the wage packet of lawyers and this can only be good for the economy in the state of recession that faces the world.

:up:

#262 hobbes

hobbes
  • Member

  • 889 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 08 March 2008 - 22:35

First of all Josta that car looks lovely :p . What are the differences between the modified maranello and the 'ferrari' limo? It's a racing car (modified so that it can race better), made my prodrive (slightly more respectable), good advertisement for Ferrari and who knows if prodrive asked for permission first

#263 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 March 2008 - 23:31

Originally posted by hobbes
First of all Josta that car looks lovely :p . What are the differences between the modified maranello and the 'ferrari' limo? It's a racing car (modified so that it can race better), made my prodrive (slightly more respectable), good advertisement for Ferrari and who knows if prodrive asked for permission first


Firstly, I agree it does look lovely, and yes the Limo is tacky beyond belief, totally destroying a perfectly good looking car.

On the other points, Ferrari stated that because it was modified it can't carry the Ferrari logo. Whether modified for racing or modified for carrying around newlyweds and people with no taste is irrelevant. Prodrive certainly is a reputable firm to carry out mods, but so is an ex McLaren F1 engineer. As for asking for permission, Ferrari's basic point in this is that in order to carry a Ferrari badge, it needs to be entirely made by Ferrari. Permission or not, the Prodrive Ferrari was clearly not entirely made by Ferrari, therefore in a court it could be argued that if the requirement for carrying a Ferrari badge is that it was totally made by Ferrari, then Prodrive Ferrari should equally be forced to remove Ferrari badges.

#264 McGuire

McGuire
  • Member

  • 9,218 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 09 March 2008 - 01:37

Originally posted by Josta


On the other points, Ferrari stated that because it was modified it can't carry the Ferrari logo. Whether modified for racing or modified for carrying around newlyweds and people with no taste is irrelevant. Prodrive certainly is a reputable firm to carry out mods, but so is an ex McLaren F1 engineer. As for asking for permission, Ferrari's basic point in this is that in order to carry a Ferrari badge, it needs to be entirely made by Ferrari. Permission or not, the Prodrive Ferrari was clearly not entirely made by Ferrari, therefore in a court it could be argued that if the requirement for carrying a Ferrari badge is that it was totally made by Ferrari, then Prodrive Ferrari should equally be forced to remove Ferrari badges.


Sure it might be argued, at which point the judge will admonish that these are Ferrari's trademark properties, not the limo builder's, and Ferrari determines how to define the Ferrari brand, not the limo builder.

It is entirely reasonable that Ferrari would permit a reputable racecar builder to trade upon its brand and refuse the limo builder. Competition is integral to the Ferrari brand while stretch limos are the antithesis of its brand image. If Ferrari allows this, a dozen more limo operators would be free to bodger together similar vehicles, which is clearly injurious to Ferrari.

#265 Scudetto

Scudetto
  • Member

  • 8,047 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 09 March 2008 - 03:26

Originally posted by Josta
Permission or not, the Prodrive Ferrari was clearly not entirely made by Ferrari, therefore in a court it could be argued that if the requirement for carrying a Ferrari badge is that it was totally made by Ferrari, then Prodrive Ferrari should equally be forced to remove Ferrari badges.


Yeah, you could make that argument in court -- so long as you could be heard over the judge's laughter.

#266 Scoots

Scoots
  • Member

  • 1,643 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 09 March 2008 - 06:38

"used with permission" is all you need to understand ... Ferrari-limo, no permission, Pro-Drive race car, permission granted.

#267 Josta

Josta
  • Member

  • 2,237 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 11 March 2008 - 11:39

Looks like the Ferrari legal team will have another case to handle now.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/7289220.stm

:stoned:

#268 Lazarus II

Lazarus II
  • Member

  • 4,527 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 11 March 2008 - 13:01

Originally posted by Josta
Looks like the Ferrari legal team will have another case to handle now.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/7289220.stm

:stoned:

They've really moved on from watches!

#269 hobbes

hobbes
  • Member

  • 889 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 11 March 2008 - 13:13

subaru engine :D

#270 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,097 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 11 March 2008 - 13:51

Originally posted by hobbes
subaru engine :D

Silly - they thought they were cloning a Porsche.

#271 Johny Bravo

Johny Bravo
  • Member

  • 2,599 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 11 March 2008 - 14:49

Originally posted by Josta
Looks like the Ferrari legal team will have another case to handle now.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/7289220.stm

:stoned:


From the same page:

SEE ALSO

Fifth of Britons 'buy fake goods'



:p

#272 jcbc3

jcbc3
  • Member

  • 5,081 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 11 March 2008 - 16:43

How about this for pettiness