Press Release - JLR goes after replica community.pdf - Google Drive
Very worrying.
They went after Suffolk Sportscars last year, who then went into liquidation.
What's going on with JLR? What's the advantage in doing this?
Printable View
Press Release - JLR goes after replica community.pdf - Google Drive
Very worrying.
They went after Suffolk Sportscars last year, who then went into liquidation.
What's going on with JLR? What's the advantage in doing this?
Might be something to do with Jaguar Land Rover | Classic Works and reducing the competition if they are losing sales . As you say concerning esp if other marques follow the trend. There are quite a few Jag replica builders around and I wonder whether they are under the same pressure?
Unbelievable.
When it said 'press release' I automatically thought JLR release, but it clearly isn't!
What a story gigantic Corporation versus Pensioners.
I've asked one of Europe's top I.P. experts to give me a bit of background to this. She said she'd do it if I don't burn the toast at lunchtime so watch this space ... err... and wish me luck with the toaster!!
I'm pretty sure she will tell you that registered designs are only protected for so long, unless specifically renewed.
Or is that copyright?
Anyway, good luck with the toast.
I'm sure we are all rooting for ya!
Sounds like Brexit should have been done and dusted sooner then!
Sounds feasible though Leigh.
Maybe they see a market for C and D type replicas once they've finished all those lightweight E types?
I presume the new rules can't be applied restrospectively? If that's the case and the replica was built 25 years after the original car when the old 25 year rule was in then it should be legal shouldn't it?
Interesting. Maybe someone should point out to the Swedish court, and JLR, that Ferrari lost a case only last year over the shape of the 250GTO because they'd not made any attempt to use that shape for a certain number of years. And a while ago Carroll Shelby also lost a case over the shape of the Cobra, which allowed replicas to continue to be built.
You often see small firms, or individuals, backing down when faced with the "might" of a large company, but that doesn't make what they're trying to do right - it's normally called "bullying". Good on this couple to try and stand up against JLR, who've just sunk to lower than low in my opinion.
These aren't current, or even recent, cars that are being replicated. I've not looked at the court ruling to see on what basis that these replicas can be outlawed, but I suspect there'll be one or two people at JLR who've got a bee in their bonnet over replicas. If there's enough hoo-ha kicked up then JLR might back down - this sort of thing does nothing for their reputation.
As for the Stratos - well, the SEC is recognised and affiliated to FCA Heritage, and when this affiliation took place early last year it was pointed out that most members' cars were replicas. The response was, to paraphrase, "so what, no bother", just so long as those cars were identified as such. And that's precisely the attitude that should be taken.
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.
I agree with that Norm. Except perhaps that JLR is a British Company. Who knows who owns what these days?
The only British thing about British Gas these days is the customers!