RE: Mercedes has Gullwing replica crushed
Discussion
Potential IP issues do not seem to have deterred this fella - http://chretienroadsters.com/300SLRoadster.aspx - and as for the rest of the cars he "offers" - http://chretienroadsters.com/default.aspx ....
If that was the car it had potential to be amazing, those looks with modern under pinnings would be one replica I would endorse. When I think replica I get images of idiots in MR2's saying "no its a real Lambo" or "no its a real 355"
I can understand why MB would do this, but its using a sledghammer to crack a nut!
I can understand why MB would do this, but its using a sledghammer to crack a nut!
Major Fallout said:
"the body of the 300 SL has been under copyright protection for a number of decades."
Im surprised they don't go round to all the houses and stamp on all the children's matchbox toys!
Maybe they don't stamp on models because the model makers have licences to use the design and pay royalties ? Maybe ? Im surprised they don't go round to all the houses and stamp on all the children's matchbox toys!
365daytonafan said:
While it doesn't affect the value of the car there is nother worse than being asked is your car replica when it's original. Happened a few times with the Daytona, and it smarts everytime.
Nothing worse than being asked a question about your car? Seriously? I guess you must lead a very sheltered and privileged life.Mr2Mike said:
365daytonafan said:
While it doesn't affect the value of the car there is nother worse than being asked is your car replica when it's original. Happened a few times with the Daytona, and it smarts everytime.
Nothing worse than being asked a question about your car? Seriously? I guess you must lead a very sheltered and privileged life.... It's complete with genuine fake wood veneer too....
BarnatosGhost said:
If this was a story about sony seizing and destroying counterfeit dvd players we wouldn't have any complaints. No different.
I clearly missed the part about this fibreglass replica being sold as a genuine 300SL, could you explain where you saw this?BarnatosGhost said:
dealmaker said:
BarnatosGhost said:
If this was a story about sony seizing and destroying counterfeit dvd players we wouldn't have any complaints. No different.
Not quite.....It's more like someone making replicas of 1950's Decca Radiogrammes - would anyone really care today?? Only people who want to buy a 1950's Decca replica.......
If the replica was a virtually perfect copy which was almost indistinguishable from the original, I can see why they may get upset. This is very clearly not the case here since it's a entirely different car with a fibreglass body shaped like a 300 SL.
MGJohn said:
Nobody's ever asked me if my Rover is a replica.
... It's complete with genuine fake wood veneer too....
There you go, yet another advantage of owning a Rover ... It's complete with genuine fake wood veneer too....
Edited by Mr2Mike on Saturday 24th March 12:54
Mr2Mike said:
BarnatosGhost said:
If this was a story about sony seizing and destroying counterfeit dvd players we wouldn't have any complaints. No different.
I clearly missed the part about this fibreglass replica being sold as a genuine 300SL, could you explain where you saw this?BarnatosGhost said:
dealmaker said:
BarnatosGhost said:
If this was a story about sony seizing and destroying counterfeit dvd players we wouldn't have any complaints. No different.
Not quite.....It's more like someone making replicas of 1950's Decca Radiogrammes - would anyone really care today?? Only people who want to buy a 1950's Decca replica.......
If the replica was a virtually perfect copy which was almost indistinguishable from the original, I can see why they may get upset. This is very clearly not the case here since it's a entirely different car with a fibreglass body shaped like a 300 SL.
MGJohn said:
Nobody's ever asked me if my Rover is a replica.
... It's complete with genuine fake wood veneer too....
There you go, yet another advantage of owning a Rover ... It's complete with genuine fake wood veneer too....
Edited by Mr2Mike on Saturday 24th March 12:54
The existence of copies, counterfeits, evocations, tributes, reincarnations, fakes, call them what you will, undermines the originals, and the work of the people who created the originals, and the assets of the people who bought the originals, which is the reason for the legislation in the first place.
Whether they're sold as originals or not.
If the rights holders have no objection, then no problem. But if they do, as in this case, then no argument.
EsGrau1994 said:
Potential IP issues do not seem to have deterred this fella - http://chretienroadsters.com/300SLRoadster.aspx - and as for the rest of the cars he "offers" - http://chretienroadsters.com/default.aspx ....
I think it has...http://chretienroadsters.com/News.aspx
"A Mercedes-Benz spokesperson said that the company is currently working on the issue of the replicas’ legality outside the European Union. So if you’re thinking about buying that gullwing fiberglass mold we featured as a Hemmings Find of the Day a couple months back, you might want to act soon and keep it well hidden."
Homage, replica "Evocation" - a wonderful word which entered into the car world in 2001 - copy, and so on all have their place. There are other threads here which are more specific. For example, a car is reputed according to the factory to have been dismantled after an accident while racing and 35 years later "reappears". It has the right chassis and some other parts from the car but the bodywork is all new. Is this the "original" car, because there is no other claimant to the chassis number? I built a recreation (that is to say exact in every detail) of a car that no longer exists and hasn't done for 60 years, knowing full well thst some would criticise and some would approve, and if the Earl of March saw fit to invite it to the Revival and the Festival who am I to argue? His attitude I find refreshing, since if the original no longer exists he will invite a recreation so the public can see a car they would otherwise never see. The shark nose Ferrari and the Lancia Ferraris are other cars in point.
On the other hand I own a replica, a Lynx D-type, which looks fine on the outside being all alloy but under the skin is pure E-type so a pastiche, although nowadays an expensive pastiche. I don't pretend it is an original, I could never afford an original, and owning it gives me a great deal of pleasure. There are many replicas out there, some recreations, some pastiches, and some lookalikes that are bloody 'orrible, but that is in my eye and not perhaps the eye of the owner.
In the case of the Mercedes, it was made in fibreglass for heaven's sake, so despite the silly comments above could never have been passed off as an original; besides, all the originals are accounted for anyway. It just strikes me as being a dog in the manger situation. The real cars are so expensive that only the privileged few will ever own one, so now the rest of us can never even, like me with the D-type, live the dream within the limits of our own purse strings.
Cobras, SS100s, XK120s, C-types, GT40's XJ13 - so many copies are made to give the ordinary person the chance to live his dream, but a Mercedes? Beware!
On the other hand I own a replica, a Lynx D-type, which looks fine on the outside being all alloy but under the skin is pure E-type so a pastiche, although nowadays an expensive pastiche. I don't pretend it is an original, I could never afford an original, and owning it gives me a great deal of pleasure. There are many replicas out there, some recreations, some pastiches, and some lookalikes that are bloody 'orrible, but that is in my eye and not perhaps the eye of the owner.
In the case of the Mercedes, it was made in fibreglass for heaven's sake, so despite the silly comments above could never have been passed off as an original; besides, all the originals are accounted for anyway. It just strikes me as being a dog in the manger situation. The real cars are so expensive that only the privileged few will ever own one, so now the rest of us can never even, like me with the D-type, live the dream within the limits of our own purse strings.
Cobras, SS100s, XK120s, C-types, GT40's XJ13 - so many copies are made to give the ordinary person the chance to live his dream, but a Mercedes? Beware!
Let's hope other manufactures dont follow suit.
The Cobra and Seven replicas are now part of the fabric , the MR2 Ferrari stuff just too silly to worry about, but could this Gullwing shenanigans create knock on consequences for those building replicas of significant manufacturers race and rally cars
.Lowtimer said:
JH2,
As I understand it, they are not just relying on a trademark argument, they are also using a copyright argument based on the artistic work of the creation of the shape, i.e. a sculpture argument, in effect.
That does appear to be the case, though I think the copyright issue is based upon the relationship in German law between copyright and design. Trying to argue that it's a work of sculpture would not get them very far in a UK court (as per Lucasfilm v Ainsworth), essentially because it's a reproduced retail item rather than something intended to be an artistic work.As I understand it, they are not just relying on a trademark argument, they are also using a copyright argument based on the artistic work of the creation of the shape, i.e. a sculpture argument, in effect.
The TM is a symbol not actual product that’s registered; it can be any combination of shape pattern character words letters numbers silhouettes creating a symbol which represents something aimed to be unique.
From what I gather Mercedes have recently registered the Gullwing body shape, silhouette not the actual specifics of an original running car (because then they would have to pay fees to other companies for things that Mercedes have copied)
Back to the article it seems someone replicated the Mercedes a bit too close to the original in terms of physical dimensions, form, shape and character for Mercedes to ignore. Note only the body was crushed because the under-pinning’s original or not do not fall under TM mark as it’s not shown or specified.
Part of me things fair play Mercedes and other part says b
ds.
From what I gather Mercedes have recently registered the Gullwing body shape, silhouette not the actual specifics of an original running car (because then they would have to pay fees to other companies for things that Mercedes have copied)
Back to the article it seems someone replicated the Mercedes a bit too close to the original in terms of physical dimensions, form, shape and character for Mercedes to ignore. Note only the body was crushed because the under-pinning’s original or not do not fall under TM mark as it’s not shown or specified.
Part of me things fair play Mercedes and other part says b
ds.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff