Given that the 'new Strato's' got as far as Luca di Montezemolo driving the prototype round Fiorano, and Fiat still weren't interested, I can't see them bringing the original car back into production?
Didn't Fiat give up the rights to the 'Strato's' name, in any case?
Re IPR, I remember one of our very own at the Lancia Centenary in 2006 was asked if he could show his Hawk replica to Fiat engineers at the Fiat Centro Stylo we were visiting!! Was that innocent interest (probably)?
Guilty as charged m'lid. Sort of.
At the la Mandria test track Giorgio Pianta sent an interpreter over to ask if he could come over and look over the Stratos replica in detail and then spent so long doing so Andrea & I missed out on the lunch that day.
At Centro Stile we were asked (by the president of the Lancia Club Italy (sorry, can't remember his name) and Dr Enrico Masala (Lancia Museum curator) to move the car to the front with three other cars (Lambda/Aprilia/Fulvia I think) for a photograph for the Company Magazine (never did get a copy..) after which we were approached by said gentlemen and asked if we'd lend them the car for the gala dinner presentation, alongside Stratos Zero, that evening being attended by the widow of Nuccio Bertone. Fortunately they were both gentlemanly enough to take 10 minutes to decide that maybe it wasn't appropriate to use a replica when it was pointed out that, being RHD, it wasn't an original!
But they didn't exclude us from the results of the regularity rally that took place at La Mandria which was lucky. Because we won it!
That was one very very memorable trip. Can't believe it was 15 years ago!
Guy
Last edited by Guy Mayers; 13-02-2021 at 10:30.
The above is a good illustration of why, as I said earlier, the issue is "complicated"
Excluding certain time-limited rights, if an individual or a company has a right to sue someone for something then they don't lose that right just because they don't exercise the right. But, their actions over time can either strengthen or dilute the effectiveness of what happens if they do exercise that right over time.
I know nothing of the replica car scene or the businesses behind it but I guess a big part of deciding which car you are going to build a business around creating a replica of will be influenced by the history of how the original manufacturer or rights holder has acted. I doubt anyone manufacturing replica Stratos cars is particularly bothered**
** unless it's yellow with blue wheels. Papa Smurf is quite litigious
Indeed it is complicated, Jim. But you can't hold the "rights" to a shape, or anything as it happens, forever, because at some point it enters the public domain. (I'd argue that the E-Type doesn't belong to Jaguar or anyone now - it actually belongs to "The 60's", because its association to that time is so strong.) And although you can argue about a company being entitled to exercise their IP rights, it nevertheless weighs heavily against them when said "infringement" has been happening for almost 40 years and they've done sod-all about it for all that time, and their actions now have put a company out of business and thrown their employees on the dole. If they suddenly feel so strongly about it, why not simply ask for a royalty on each car sold? It's not like Suffolk made rubbish cars!
And, if the assertion that it's about money is to hold any water, then both Jaguar and these replica builders must be in the same market. But they're not - even if Creare are selling at £250K, it's nowhere even close to what Jaguar are (will be) asking for their C-Type continuations. The person who considers one, won't (or can't) consider the other, so no way are they in competition and taking sales from each other. Did I hear someone say they're taking their ball home?
Unless its changed TATA own JLR and thats Indian
I've no dog in the fight Norm so am ambivalent about it all. In general I think we're in agreement that something doesn't seem quite right here, but without spending time translating the judgement in this case and reading all the background to the judgement it's far easier to just conclude that it is indeed complicated and that there's probably a bit of nuance which, if we knew of it, we would all nod and say, "Ahhhh, ok." Or it might be a perverse judgement.
My only real observation is if you copy someones homework at school and get caught then you usually get into trouble. Setting up a business whose success depends on copying someone else's work without their express permission may be considered rash. Doing so without weighing up the likelyhood of getting caught and into trouble and the consequences that may flow from that might also be considered rash.
However, lots of successful businesses take decisions every day which could have positive or negative implications that are far more likely to impact the business than the extremely remote possibility that they may be sued, successfully or otherwise, out of the blue for IP infringement.
And when you say, "I'd argue that the E-Type doesn't belong to Jaguar or anyone now - it actually belongs to "The 60's"," the great thing is that if you're the owner of the company being sued you get to make that argument and any other ones you want.
Anyhow...over and out. I'm off to take the dogs out and make a snowman
Now Ian, you're just trying to curry favour.
Jim, forgot to mention - Papa Smurf said he's not bothered about mine cos he can't see over the wheel. And the blue's a different shade so it's not any kind of copy Mr. Alitalia, though.....well, I suggest you take the initiative and write to them, asking for a coupla hundred quid a month for the (otherwise free) advertising. Then split the proceeds with me cos I've got IP on the idea.
And yeah, this "replica" argument is all moot in a way because it doesn't threaten us directly.....yet. But I hate to see people/companies throwing their weight around bullying others.
Last edited by Normb666; 13-02-2021 at 14:33.
Bookmarks