This is a read-only archive of the old Madabout Kitcars forum. New posts and replies are no longer possible, but every thread is still here to browse and read.
Some of the recent 250s are extremely attractive in relation to individual, well known chassis numbers. The kit manufacturers, and even the build agents cannot stop what the customer puts on the car. However, the oem will not care, it is their brand and ip that is being used for leverage (for that is what it actually is). What constitutes proprietor style, as ponited out already, debatable. The DNA approach, understandable as it is, was leaching big bucks. Hardly a cottage industry when you look at the added value coming from what the oem perceives as their ip.
My mane concern is for the guys stuck in a mare of a situation and being saddled with half built cars due to the supplier falling foal of the law ....but hay , what do I know ......
don't worry coats on and taxi's been ordered .....
I really , genuinely think that the buck will stop at DNA's door , if the above is correct ...The cars were scarily accurate in many ways , big badge useage etc. I do wonder what's different this time , as I cannot believe that DNA have not received communications before ...they are no stranger to obvious replication.
I think other manufacturers / build agents/ home builders etc. should take heed of the warning shot thats been fired and tone down the 'similarities' a little , maybe ?
I am no expert on this by any means and don't know where the line is drawn , the silhouette argument has been explained to me in the past , but thats tricky because an Aston silhouette or a Maserati silhouette etc often is spookily similar to the Ferrari etc.
I think the minute you badge up , its an issue ...I know Aston covet their grille shape as well ...but putting Ferrari badges on must be a step too far...
Imitation is usually the greatest form of flattery , but I think the concern may be that a whole heap of replica's will affect genuine prices and credibility ... Slightly different situation , but the saturated market place for fake Cobra's must have affected genuine Cobra ownership ...how many of us would assume replica before genuine , if a Cobra went past you on the road ...we all do it ...Even watches , clothing etc...we all assume its a Bolex before Rolex .....so maybe thats an issue , maybe its brand useage ...I don't know ...I'd love to hear both sides of this argument , as a builder who strays into ''inspiration'' territory and tries to avoid replication , I really would love to know where the line is drawn and why its there ....
I agree, especially as they regularly used the same designers for the prettiest cars. I don't envy you treading the fine line.
The kit manufacturers, and even the build agents cannot stop what the customer puts on the car.
But that's the point - in this case it was DNA badging their own demonstrators, as in Nubodis case for the ex demo and new number 7 car - they're knowingly using the IP to make sales - it's not the end user that's brought this on, it's the manufacturer and build agent.
I THINK MY LINE IS A LOT THICKER THAN SOME ...I don't think anyone could argue my product is a copy of any one particular manufacturers work ...
Interesting times ahead though ...I'd still like to hear the official word on what's happened ...
I agree that you have a much stronger case than some others.
It doesn't help when the oems get heavy though. They just want to put a stop to it, and fear is a good starting place for them, being a lot cheaper than legal cases.
For demonstrators there can be no excuse. For customer cars, at the end of the day they are built to order .... ish.
Agreed ...If a customer chooses to 'badge up' thats not the Manufacturers or agents fault ...they aren't in control of what happens post sale or delivery and its a bit like an illegally spaced number plate or wrong coloured plates on a late model car in some ways ....some choose to chance it , others won't ...if you do , you take your chances and thats that ...
To the best of my knowledge its a practice carried out by customers and Agents on the Tribute line ....I don't think Chris has ever fitted badges to one of his kits , as he is quite aware of the implications of upsetting a major manufacturer ...
From a promotional point of view , I can totally see why agents and other manufacturers do it ..but they all know the risk , same as I did when I ran illegally spaced number plates for years on various cars ....
I agree that you have a much stronger case than some others.
It doesn't help when the oems get heavy though. They just want to put a stop to it, and fear is a good starting place for them, being a lot cheaper than legal cases.
Agreed ..its working isn't it ? we are all talking about it , running a bit scared etc...I have no worries at all about the Formosa , as with the S*mmio ...it replicates nothing ...but I also make my living and associate with people and customers / projects etc that are nearer the knuckle and would rather we all carried on just as we are ....
I couldn't find the original link through for this thread either.
However, the industry has been here before namely with Cobra kits and
Lotus 7's.
From what I can remember with the Cobra case it simply ended with the replica manufacturers not being allowed to use the word Cobra in their marketing.
The Lotus 7 being made by Westfield was a like for like copy so they had to make a few changes to the body work until Lotus were happy. The original Westfield 7's are now known as the pre litigation cars !
The bottom line is that there are still plenty of Cobra kits and Lotus 7 style kits to choose from on the market today.
Ferrari have been here before, I also understand the Datsun 250 kits were stopped and the moulds cut up. At the time nobody took the concept further.
I would think the Tribute and DNA Z3 cars are far enough away from being copies. Their physical dimensions and proportions as well as whats under the skin is very much far removed from the real thing.
I can understand Ferrari being upset with Ferrari badges on the demo cars but I would think that would be the end of it, I hope.
Think also Champagne and other brands of fizzy wine. Some fizzy wine is better imo but they aren't allowed to call it Champagne which is the real deal .
Think Melton Mowbray , think pork pies, but only the real one can call itself a Melton Mowbray !
Make some attractive 60's style fibre glass panel kits, but don't badge it up as a F........
Again, as echoed above, something tangible regarding what's actually happened between DNA, Maranello and/or Cosa Nostra Legal Services would be useful.
From experience of having to deal with a legal case involving partners in a design company falling out financially, which led to a technical burglary and alleged theft of original designs from one business partner by another, I can say with some authority that the laws covering intellectual property, design ownership and trademarks are very complex.
In the case of a company such as DNA/Tribute/Fiorano building visually similar cars to historic Ferrari models, two factors come into play: 1) copyright of the original design; 2) trademark infringement.
Copyright of the original design is currently owned by the individual who can prove they drew the first sketches (or electronic equivalent) and completed the design, and passes on to their heirs for seventy years after their death. That remains true regardless of who employed the designer and/or commissioned the design. Contrary to popular belief, paying someone to design something for you doesn't automatically make you the owner of their design.
So, legally, the right to stop somebody else copying *the Ferrari 250 Califormia Spyder body shape rests with the individual designer (or his heirs if deceased) employed by Pininfarina to draw the shape when Ferrari commissioned them to create a convertible version of the 250.
As such, it shouldn't really be Ferrari that would bring litigation against companies creating similar shaped cars but whoever penned the shape in the first place.
*To make it even more complicated, minor changes to the dimensions or look of the car - a different nose-cone on a seven, for example, can mean that the design copyright hasn't been breached at all.
If a manufacturer of a historic model from its range designed by someone else brought legal action for breach of copyright a decent lawyer could keep that gravy train rolling for years without a court ever reaching an adjudication.
Trademark infringement, however, is much simpler. Ferrari and the Cavallino Rampante are the registered trademarks of a current business. If you are manufacturing goods, including tee shirts, baseball caps, manbags or cars, and putting Ferrari logos on them without Maranello's permission, you're infringing their trademark, full stop.
As has been rightly pointed out above though, they're more likely to notice and take action if it's a business that's making money off the back of their trademark rather than a man in a shed gluing a prancing horse to his home built pride and joy.
Really? You believe they employed a designer and let them keep the rights after paying for the design?
And the whole gravy train thing is exactly the point - if Ferrari were fronting you out with their massive resources are you really going to try and argue and face potentially 100s of thousands of legal fees or fold and take it on the chin?
Whatever route they took DNA clearly didn't have the appetite to attempt a defense. I'm sure F could make some pretty nasty threats...
I was told they'd been shut down - no reason to doubt the source
Basically they took the chance having had a great run up to now but got pulled on this one
One good way to avoid copyright infringement regarding Cavallino/Ferrari badges on a replica car might be to source OEM badges. The argument can then be made that if the copyright applies to the badge rather than the badged product (car) you have not breached any legislation as the badge is original.
I am however sure suppliers of OEM badges are very hard to buy from, and being a bit short of the readies for a genuine F I'll never find out.
I think (as Mr Towed stated) the difference is this: if a manufacturer makes a product and badges it as an existing (copyrighted) product he is both abusing copyright and profiting through sales being boosted.
If I buy or build a replica kit car and choose to badge it as the original I have nothing to gain financially. I suspect any issue that F have with DNA comes from this issue. Profits are being made by a replica getting leverage from the F brand.
Really? You believe they employed a designer and let them keep the rights after paying for the design?
I've just had a brief look through the legislation again as it was a couple of years ago that I had to investigate my one case of theft of intellectual property, and yes, I believe that Ferrari can employ an individual or company to design them a car and not own the design rights even after paying for the design.
As I said before, the legal side of all this is very complex, but, in a nutshell, when a car company pays for a design what they're actually buying is the right to produce a car to that design, not the design itself. That remains with the original designer, and I concede that in the case of the California Spyder, that is most likely to be Pininfarina, but only if the guy wielding the pen was an employee of theirs. If he was a freelance designer that Pininfarina subcontracted the work to, an unpaid intern or a partner/director of the business, then the design remains his own intellectual property.
The one case I investigated was decided on that very point. Rather than being an employee, the person accused of stealing the intellectual property had been a director of the company it 'belonged' to when he created the designs, and although he had sold his half of the business to the other director, in law the designs remained his property. That was decided by a room full of specialist lawyers as with an IQ of just 148 it was all way beyond my limited comprehension.
Anyway, I'm not trying to stir up an argument or score points here, I just wanted to contribute what little I know about the minefield which is copyright and trademark law to add to the discussion.
As for DNA, it's a shame if they really have had to close up shop as I rather liked the 2-fifty cal, even if the back end did look very much like the arse-end of an MGB.
Hmm, I wonder who owns the rights to the MGB back bumper design...
INTERESTING STUFF ....And like what has already been said , complex enough to stop most people fighting their corner against a multi million pound organisation ....
I really hope its just a hiccup for DNA rather than a halt to their business ...it's an incredibly difficult industry to survive in and they were doing rather well with some clever and quality builds ....
I think that the ownership of the original designs is a distraction. The designer owns them, but the important point is, who has the right to turn those drawings into a car? Only Ferrari can make a Ferrari.
The DNA "record auction" ad has now been removed (others from the same auction haven't) but the synopsis still mentions Ferrari more than once.
I struggle to understand why anyone might wonder why Ferrari would take steps to stop the use of its name.
The Tribute and DNA products are stunning. They don't need the F word or "250" of "2fifty" to sell them. I also think that there is a difference between what Tribute and DNA set out to achieve. The clue is in the names........
I don't know what has happened over there but I hope all is still good with the guys over at DNA. There are so many kit car companies out there with 'the best intentions' that often fail to deliver. We need companies like the team at DNA for our hobby to continue. There have been some terrible happenings over here in the US where companies disappear with people's money and only deliver part kits.
I know the US law is different, but when I bought an 'unlicensed' product of something that was actually made by the original manufacturer, I was required by the reseller to sign an agreement, stating that I wouldn't add badges to it or in other ways make inference that it was a product of the original manufacturer.
I guess that way, if I decide to add badges, I'm liable and the supplier has done their best to prevent me (everything in their power) from badging up their product.
People often bring up the Merc Gullwing that was crushed when talking about this. From what I understand, that was a car that Mercedes bought, to make a point! Today in the US, if that car had been based on a Mercedes frame, there is very little they could have done about it, due to the aftermarket laws for parts.
There have been a ton of companies in the US that have been sent cease and desist orders. Mostly Lamborghini replicas and more recently Bentley. Ferrari also stepped in on the Mera product which was a new car based on the Fiero.
I wonder if Porsche hasn't been able to go after 356 kit makers due to the lineage of the design?
Its a shame that there aren't more original designs in the kit car world that can hold there heads up with the best of main stream manufacturers. There have been a few designs but more often than not they are quirky and only appeal to a very small audience. The engineering talent is there in abundance and so are the skills to create the best GRP work. It just need some talent in the field of body design and bring it all together.
Original designs in the kit car world........ To be sold in large quantity do they have to appeal to the greater masses or the kit car enthusiasts? If it's to the greater masses, then won't they just end up like another eurobox?, and if it's a kit car hen it can't compete on price. Surely the designs have to be quirky to appeal to a niche market, so at least they get some sales! One that springs to mind is the Nova - what a great idea!
Original designs in the kit car world........ To be sold in large quantity do they have to appeal to the greater masses or the kit car enthusiasts? If it's to the greater masses, then won't they just end up like another eurobox?, and if it's a kit car hen it can't compete on price. Surely the designs have to be quirky to appeal to a niche market, so at least they get some sales! One that springs to mind is the Nova - what a great idea!
I'm talking the kit car world. Most of the best selling kit cars over the last 30 years have been Cobra lookalikes and Lotus 7 inspired cars. They have been the mainstream kits for sure. More recently the re body craze has focused heavily on a certain Italian manufacturer ( with some stunning results I might add ). They have become popular and sell well because they are so good in the looks department.
I maintain that originality in the kit car scene has for the most part only generated quirky designs.
@MrTowed - totally bow to your knowledge - it is fascinating stuff and obviously a minefield!
L@lm - only a few come to mind: Phantom GTR, GTM Libra and Spyder and I guess Ultima as originals. Big fan of Blackwell SPR although some obvious TVR DNA - pics do not do it it justice. And actually the GR120 plenty of 50s DNA