Printable View
I think it was last year that JLR tried to stop Ineos using the Land Rover design for their new Grenadier. But when you are are one of the richest men in the UK it is unsurprising JLR lost. Apparently JLR tried to copyright the LR design after they stopped production. As we all know it is easier for money to get what it wants.
I had the impression that it is an Indian company?Quote:
Originally Posted by john
I think it was the Indians who bought it off Ford, but god knows what's happened in the meantime.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longtimefan
Sounds like Gordon might know who actually owns it. Most of these geezers want to call themselves British. Until it's time to fill in the tax return anyway.......
I believe TATA now own JLR
Well said Norm ! This is frankly outrageous - we should support this appeal and maybe lobby the Kit press.Quote:
Replicas continue to promote the heritage of a given company, and put their former triumphs and glories out there where they can be seen and appreciated by the public, who can then learn more about their history. They should be actively encouraged, as some of the JLR bosses have previously done. I deplore and condemn this sort of behaviour, and especially from a British company who should know better....and a Swedish court who obviously don't.
Yep and Tetley Tea!Quote:
Originally Posted by David J
FWIW Many years ago I used to work for Tetley Tea (pre-Tata) and understand the Tata take-over was pretty brutal - with not much sympathy for the long-established traditions of the Company.
I had a quick read through the Swedish court decision ( translated!) and the basis of the judgement was the design was protected for 70 years after the death of the designer, deemed to be Malcolm Sayer (d 1970).
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bTb...Z_bPvI8eP/view
So when the designer dies the rules at the time was 25 year protection. This meant after 1995 you could make a replica.
The law was changed in 2020 to extend it to 70 years. If the replica was made whilst the rules allwoed it, how can new laws make it illegal? I thought stuff like this couldn't be applied restrospectively?
The press release also say the case was initially started in 2018 - which was before the extnesion of the rights to 70 years?
More and more mysterious then.
If the press release is to be believed, there does seem a good case for appeal. Maybe Sweden are looking for a deal to fill up the SAAB factory again.
If the worst comes to the worst they can always seek refuge from Swedish law in the Bolivian embassy.