Jaguar Land Rover goes after replica community
Discussion
V12 Migaloo said:
As always so many informed voices on here and some not so informed... Despite the various replies, especially from those who feel it their obvious duty to protect JLR's action in this discussion, I still don't understand the business logic behind the pursuit of one manufacture who has only ever built one car.
Have you not tread this thread?JLR only went after them when they engaged an agent about building another half dozen or so for commercial gain....thats when the bear got poked with a stick and the point of no return had passed as the legal teams had sprung into action.
Like only a few others it would appear on here, I really can't understand all this anger directed towards JLR. The anger should be directed at the people that were wielding the stick that they then poked the bear with.
If they had just built the one car for themselves, as JLR clearly understood that they would be doing, they would likely be enjoying that now, and this thread wouldn't exist.
I've seen it before in another area, where tacit unofficial help from an OEM enabled a certain project to keep going, until someone within that circle of information receipt stepped over the 'informal line' and used some of that info for other purposes, and once the OEM found out, all help and support was then withdrawn.
aeropilot said:
Have you not tread this thread?
JLR only went after them when they engaged an agent about building another half dozen or so for commercial gain....thats when the bear got poked with a stick and the point of no return had passed as the legal teams had sprung into action.
Like only a few others it would appear on here, I really can't understand all this anger directed towards JLR. The anger should be directed at the people that were wielding the stick that they then poked the bear with.
If they had just built the one car for themselves, as JLR clearly understood that they would be doing, they would likely be enjoying that now, and this thread wouldn't exist.
I've seen it before in another area, where tacit unofficial help from an OEM enabled a certain project to keep going, until someone within that circle of information receipt stepped over the 'informal line' and used some of that info for other purposes, and once the OEM found out, all help and support was then withdrawn.
What appears beyond doubt is that Jaguar *have* been quite happy in the past for various companies to make a business out of tool room copies of C types.JLR only went after them when they engaged an agent about building another half dozen or so for commercial gain....thats when the bear got poked with a stick and the point of no return had passed as the legal teams had sprung into action.
Like only a few others it would appear on here, I really can't understand all this anger directed towards JLR. The anger should be directed at the people that were wielding the stick that they then poked the bear with.
If they had just built the one car for themselves, as JLR clearly understood that they would be doing, they would likely be enjoying that now, and this thread wouldn't exist.
I've seen it before in another area, where tacit unofficial help from an OEM enabled a certain project to keep going, until someone within that circle of information receipt stepped over the 'informal line' and used some of that info for other purposes, and once the OEM found out, all help and support was then withdrawn.
Here’s just one example: https://pendine.com/cars-for-sale/1952-jaguar-c-ty...
It is said that one or more senior Jaguar people have owned such vehicles, and that Jaguar’s own race series has allowed these to compete as if originals.
To the layman, this is “blessing” & acceptance of the long-standing practice. As a result, many believe Jaguar has benefited from goodwill towards the brand.
Jaguar now appear to have performed an abrupt volte face. Just as in politics, it doesn’t matter if they are allowed to do so; it matters only that they appear to have said “we don’t care about the optics of this act.”
People are angry. Their anger is justified - that which was allowed yesterday is seemingly forbidden today. Many who have invested large sums in tool room copies may be thinking “but for the grace of God go I” or even “what happens when tomorrow they change their mind again and decide to go after my car?”
If anyone has a copy in production right now, I wonder what they are thinking and feeling?
That doesn’t mean that Jaguar were not also justified in doing what they have done. But it doesn’t detract from the entirely justifiable human emotions resulting from that action.
Legal or not, justified or not, it is hard to see Jaguar’s actions as anything but - at best - clumsy.
And that’s all. It may not be wrong legally for Jaguar to do what they’ve done. But it is IMHO rather odd not to recognise the entirely reasonable & justified emotional reaction this action has triggered after so many decades of doing precisely the opposite.
skwdenyer said:
aeropilot said:
Have you not tread this thread?
JLR only went after them when they engaged an agent about building another half dozen or so for commercial gain....thats when the bear got poked with a stick and the point of no return had passed as the legal teams had sprung into action.
Like only a few others it would appear on here, I really can't understand all this anger directed towards JLR. The anger should be directed at the people that were wielding the stick that they then poked the bear with.
If they had just built the one car for themselves, as JLR clearly understood that they would be doing, they would likely be enjoying that now, and this thread wouldn't exist.
I've seen it before in another area, where tacit unofficial help from an OEM enabled a certain project to keep going, until someone within that circle of information receipt stepped over the 'informal line' and used some of that info for other purposes, and once the OEM found out, all help and support was then withdrawn.
What appears beyond doubt is that Jaguar *have* been quite happy in the past for various companies to make a business out of tool room copies of C types.JLR only went after them when they engaged an agent about building another half dozen or so for commercial gain....thats when the bear got poked with a stick and the point of no return had passed as the legal teams had sprung into action.
Like only a few others it would appear on here, I really can't understand all this anger directed towards JLR. The anger should be directed at the people that were wielding the stick that they then poked the bear with.
If they had just built the one car for themselves, as JLR clearly understood that they would be doing, they would likely be enjoying that now, and this thread wouldn't exist.
I've seen it before in another area, where tacit unofficial help from an OEM enabled a certain project to keep going, until someone within that circle of information receipt stepped over the 'informal line' and used some of that info for other purposes, and once the OEM found out, all help and support was then withdrawn.
Here’s just one example: https://pendine.com/cars-for-sale/1952-jaguar-c-ty...
It is said that one or more senior Jaguar people have owned such vehicles, and that Jaguar’s own race series has allowed these to compete as if originals.
To the layman, this is “blessing” & acceptance of the long-standing practice. As a result, many believe Jaguar has benefited from goodwill towards the brand.
Jaguar now appear to have performed an abrupt volte face. Just as in politics, it doesn’t matter if they are allowed to do so; it matters only that they appear to have said “we don’t care about the optics of this act.”
People are angry. Their anger is justified - that which was allowed yesterday is seemingly forbidden today. Many who have invested large sums in tool room copies may be thinking “but for the grace of God go I” or even “what happens when tomorrow they change their mind again and decide to go after my car?”
If anyone has a copy in production right now, I wonder what they are thinking and feeling?
That doesn’t mean that Jaguar were not also justified in doing what they have done. But it doesn’t detract from the entirely justifiable human emotions resulting from that action.
Legal or not, justified or not, it is hard to see Jaguar’s actions as anything but - at best - clumsy.
And that’s all. It may not be wrong legally for Jaguar to do what they’ve done. But it is IMHO rather odd not to recognise the entirely reasonable & justified emotional reaction this action has triggered after so many decades of doing precisely the opposite.
MarkwG said:
Since, as "lay people", we have no way of knowing what agreements were made between Jaguar & those companies, the outward appearance is largely irrelevant - they may have legal authority going back decades for all we know, that doesn't give anyone else the right to follow suit without such authority. I'd like someone to explain why it is acceptable for Ferrari, Ford, BMW, Mercedes, Caterham, et al to take action to protect their heritage, but not Jaguar? Why do those that position themselves as guardians of that heritage object to the company that actually own it taking action to protect it?
MarkwG said:
I'd like someone to explain why it is acceptable for Ferrari, Ford, BMW, Mercedes, Caterham, et al to take action to protect their heritage, but not Jaguar? Why do those that position themselves as guardians of that heritage object to the company that actually own it taking action to protect it?
I have asked this question before and the general consensus was that people of a certain age and active on the car scene in the 60s and early 70s generally feel like they “knew the company” because it was independently owned and you would see Sir William at events and stuff. I’m sure if you did a survey of the age of replica owners and people who got their pants in a twist over this issue the average age would probably be early 70s craigjm said:
I have asked this question before and the general consensus was that people of a certain age and active on the car scene in the 60s and early 70s generally feel like they “knew the company” because it was independently owned and you would see Sir William at events and stuff. I’m sure if you did a survey of the age of replica owners and people who got their pants in a twist over this issue the average age would probably be early 70s
I suspect you've hit the nail on the head. "knowing the company" & "having the right to copy their products" seems a bit of a leap to me, fraught with danger.a8hex said:
An alternative question.
If you own a car are you allowed to sell pictures of your car?
Seems you aren't allowed to sell pictures of your own Jaguar without permission even if you took the photo yourself.If you own a car are you allowed to sell pictures of your car?
Philip Porter owns the Geneva E-Type 9600 HP (incidentally one of the pair of replicas JLR are offering to sell you for a ridiculous amount of money - the first Philip, heard about this was when he read about it in the press).
This is a direct quote from Philip, " ... JLR have stated that I have to have a licence to sell photographs of my own car and give them a variety of information, such as price, size, quantity, how they would be marketed, etc...."
Edited by XJ13 on Monday 3rd May 17:14
XJ13 said:
a8hex said:
An alternative question.
If you own a car are you allowed to sell pictures of your car?
Seems you aren't allowed to sell pictures of your own Jaguar without permission even if you took the photo yourself.If you own a car are you allowed to sell pictures of your car?
Philip Porter owns the Geneva E-Type 9600 HP (incidentally one of the pair of replicas JLR are offering to sell you for a ridiculous amount of money - the first Philip, heard about this was when he read about it in the press).
This is a direct quote from Philip, " ... JLR have stated that I have to have a licence to sell photographs of my own car and give them a variety of information, such as price, size, quantity, how they would be marketed, etc...."
Edited by XJ13 on Monday 3rd May 17:32
MarkwG said:
I'd like someone to explain why it is acceptable for Ferrari, Ford, BMW, Mercedes, Caterham, et al to take action to protect their heritage, but not Jaguar?
Perhaps then you should read the posting you just quoted because skwdenyer just answered that question very eloquently. It's the manner of the change of attitude which has ruffled feathers.
XJ13 said:
Someone senior within JLR really needs to have a meaningful discussion with their Legal IP Department - seems to me they are out of control and risk causing a lack of goodwill that will surely reflect on sales of new Jaguars.
Does seem to be a case of tail wagging dog, or in this case cat.XJ13 said:
Someone senior within JLR really needs to have a meaningful discussion with their Legal IP Department - seems to me they are out of control and risk causing a lack of goodwill that will surely reflect on sales of new Jaguars.
Really? The vast majority of new cars buyers, especially in markets like China, don’t give one fig about the history of the company and all that. It’s just a consumer product and for those vast majority of buyers they will have already forgotten about this story. That’s if they have even read it in the first place. Lots of people that are upset about this have never bought a new Jaguar in their life and therefore the company doesn’t care because these people are Jaguar drivers not customers. On this thread and others about it there is a seriously overblown opinion that the small group of aggrieved people actually have some power over the future of the company and its potential sales. Edited by XJ13 on Monday 3rd May 17:32
Edited by craigjm on Monday 3rd May 20:39
a8hex said:
MarkwG said:
I'd like someone to explain why it is acceptable for Ferrari, Ford, BMW, Mercedes, Caterham, et al to take action to protect their heritage, but not Jaguar?
Perhaps then you should read the posting you just quoted because skwdenyer just answered that question very eloquently. It's the manner of the change of attitude which has ruffled feathers.
XJ13 said:
Someone senior within JLR really needs to have a meaningful discussion with their Legal IP Department - seems to me they are out of control and risk causing a lack of goodwill that will surely reflect on sales of new Jaguars.
Does seem to be a case of tail wagging dog, or in this case cat.craigjm said:
Really? The vast majority of new cars buyers, especially in markets like China, don’t give one fig about the history of the company
Then why do Jaguar's marketing people keep bring up their history?
There are loads on Jaguar's website, only I have to agree to their draconian license terms before referring to those one so probably I'm not allowed to post them here. This pic was already on PH so I'll go with this.
or you could read https://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-britishcars/ja...
I know you don't give a fig for Jaguar's history but funily enough they themselves seem to.
a8hex said:
craigjm said:
Really? The vast majority of new cars buyers, especially in markets like China, don’t give one fig about the history of the company
Then why do Jaguar's marketing people keep bring up their history?There are loads on Jaguar's website, only I have to agree to their draconian license terms before referring to those one so probably I'm not allowed to post them here. This pic was already on PH so I'll go with this.
or you could read https://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-britishcars/ja...
I know you don't give a fig for Jaguar's history but funily enough they themselves seem to.
I don't think Craig has implied he doesn't care about Jaguar history either: he's challenging the assumption that Jaguars customer base will be disaffected by a court case in Sweden, about cars they have little interest in, as am I.
MarkwG said:
a8hex said:
craigjm said:
Really? The vast majority of new cars buyers, especially in markets like China, don’t give one fig about the history of the company
Then why do Jaguar's marketing people keep bring up their history?There are loads on Jaguar's website, only I have to agree to their draconian license terms before referring to those one so probably I'm not allowed to post them here. This pic was already on PH so I'll go with this.
or you could read https://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-britishcars/ja...
I know you don't give a fig for Jaguar's history but funily enough they themselves seem to.
I don't think Craig has implied he doesn't care about Jaguar history either: he's challenging the assumption that Jaguars customer base will be disaffected by a court case in Sweden, about cars they have little interest in, as am I.
lowdrag said:
It was interesting seeing the public reaction to these photos and the documentary. Which car was the most admired?
About 60/40 in favour of the oldie it seemed.
Relevance? Somewhere around zero. Or are you saying that because 60% of a group spent more time looking at the older car this automatically gives rights to make and sell copies of it? About 60/40 in favour of the oldie it seemed.
This thread is about copies, knock-offs and fakes and a company deciding that as the world has changed dramatically it must finally change with it. It is also about an old boy who took the piss by using JLR goodwill and resources for a 'personal' project which then miraculously transpired to be a competing business built entirely off someone else's belongings. And then even had the temerity to set up a charity page that deliberately omitted key facts.
If you found yourself dining opposite a chap sporting a fake Patek that he had made or had made then one could marvel at the engineering and dedication to a brand but if that conversation were to trip into said person thinking they had some kind of say over the company, some kind of god given right to make copies or that they were angry at the company because they were stopping people from making new copies then quite rightly one would begin to suspect that you had been seated opposite an entitled and deluded mentalist and you'd be very keen for the port and cheese to be exhausted.
While it's understandable that the fans of copies might be upset that they might not be able to buy copies any more, the fans of real Jaguars arguably don't mind. And the fans of copies have had it so good for so long that all the frothing really does smack of toys coming out of prams and hot air indignation.
All the old copies still exist. We now all know that if we try to create a new one then on our head be it but the reality is that the run was so good for so long that some people got themselves confused to the point that they thought their cars were Jaguars and that they had some kind of genuine right and voice to do what they wanted.
And as for the whole driving experience, one could probably easily get away with building an exact mechanical copy, clothing it in a body that doesn't infringe IP, stick it on a Q plate and Jaguar wouldn't waste a moment of their time on it. All JLR are really doing is calling time on people sticking Jaguar badges and bodies on cars that aren't Jaguars or that model of Jaguar.
DonkeyApple said:
Relevance? Somewhere around zero. Or are you saying that because 60% of a group spent more time looking at the older car this automatically gives rights to make and sell copies of it?
Putting words into peoples mouths and then arguing against them isn't a discussion. It is popular on PH though 
Perhaps he's saying that there is interest in Jaguars heritage, despite what a vociferous earlier poster has said.
Perhaps he's saying that the beauty of the earlier Jaguar designs have never been bettered. In which case I'd agree with him.
I doubt very much he's saying what you attribute to him.
Relevance? At least equal to finding yourself sitting next to someone wearing a homemade Patek replica
GoodOlBoy said:
DonkeyApple said:
Relevance? Somewhere around zero. Or are you saying that because 60% of a group spent more time looking at the older car this automatically gives rights to make and sell copies of it?
Putting words into peoples mouths and then arguing against them isn't a discussion. It is popular on PH though Perhaps he's saying that there is interest in Jaguars heritage, despite what a vociferous earlier poster has said.
Perhaps he's saying that the beauty of the earlier Jaguar designs have never been bettered. In which case I'd agree with him.
I doubt very much he's saying what you attribute to him.
Relevance? At least equal to finding yourself sitting next to someone wearing a homemade Patek replica
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff