Jaguar Land Rover goes after replica community
Discussion
Some post cleaning? Due to copyright infringement possibly?
Précis of an article: Bloke who was 20 when his maternal Grandfather passed and who has recently set up a new business has said exactly what new business needs its potential customers to hear in a Sunday advert for the business. Lady who was trying to make personal
Gains from selling someone else's work was asked to desist and behave. And the chap who used JLR to make a copy and then tried to turn it into a business is upset and being told to behave.
What is nice to see is that the Arthur Daley element of old Jags is well and truly alive and kicking.
Précis of an article: Bloke who was 20 when his maternal Grandfather passed and who has recently set up a new business has said exactly what new business needs its potential customers to hear in a Sunday advert for the business. Lady who was trying to make personal
Gains from selling someone else's work was asked to desist and behave. And the chap who used JLR to make a copy and then tried to turn it into a business is upset and being told to behave.
What is nice to see is that the Arthur Daley element of old Jags is well and truly alive and kicking.
DonkeyApple said:
Some post cleaning? Due to copyright infringement possibly?
Précis of an article: Bloke who was 20 when his maternal Grandfather passed and who has recently set up a new business has said exactly what new business needs its potential customers to hear in a Sunday advert for the business. Lady who was trying to make personal
Gains from selling someone else's work was asked to desist and behave. And the chap who used JLR to make a copy and then tried to turn it into a business is upset and being told to behave.
What is nice to see is that the Arthur Daley element of old Jags is well and truly alive and kicking.
Précis of an article: Bloke who was 20 when his maternal Grandfather passed and who has recently set up a new business has said exactly what new business needs its potential customers to hear in a Sunday advert for the business. Lady who was trying to make personal
Gains from selling someone else's work was asked to desist and behave. And the chap who used JLR to make a copy and then tried to turn it into a business is upset and being told to behave.
What is nice to see is that the Arthur Daley element of old Jags is well and truly alive and kicking.
that's definition of ironic 
...?craigjm said:
MarkwG said:
lowdrag said:
Be careful for what you wish. The XJ220 wasn't built by Jaguar and neither really have any of the recent "continuation" cars.
That's a red herring, & completely irrelevant to the IP issue - the XJ220 was built for Jaguar, as are the continuation cars! Therefore the men & women wielding the tools had JLRs permission to build them. I'm struggling with why that is confusing people here.malaccamax said:
craigjm said:
MarkwG said:
lowdrag said:
Be careful for what you wish. The XJ220 wasn't built by Jaguar and neither really have any of the recent "continuation" cars.
That's a red herring, & completely irrelevant to the IP issue - the XJ220 was built for Jaguar, as are the continuation cars! Therefore the men & women wielding the tools had JLRs permission to build them. I'm struggling with why that is confusing people here.It's not unusual for companies to sub contract, rather than take the whole business risk themselves, particularly on such a high profile/high risk project. Renault did similar with the Clio V6, Porsche subcontracted the build of the original Boxster to Valmet. The car business is littered with simialr examples
lowdrag said:
The bad news today is that another company in the UK has received the dreaded notice to "close or see you in court".
If they are telling people they have received such a letter then they have already lost part of the battle. The first rule of any cease and desist activity is light fight club, don't talk about cease and desist activity. It may be of interest to sports car enthusiasts how one of the original designs for a low drag body came about nearly a decade before the D type Jaguar was manufactured, Donald Healey and Ian Duncan came up with the idea for a low drag body & the Duncan Healey was produced using his wind tunnel or a motor car rather than an aircraft. The war was now over and having already a work force he utilized them in car manufacturing, as a lot of aircraft manufacturers did. His company was called Duncan industries. From the photographs below you can see the similar lines the Duncan has compared to the D type. The Duncan Healey was produced for one year only in 1947 and cost more than a Rolls Royce when new. You can see the Back, Front & central hump with the air vent behind the hump. This shows that there are design similarities between the Duncan and the D type but the Duncan is 10 Years older than the D type
Jaguar Land Rover has recently won a Landmark copyright infringement case and were given copyright protection over replicas of the 1951 C type, when a Swedish pensioner who was a classic car collector was sued by Jaguar Land Rover over his replica C type
I can send pictures if required
Jaguar Land Rover has recently won a Landmark copyright infringement case and were given copyright protection over replicas of the 1951 C type, when a Swedish pensioner who was a classic car collector was sued by Jaguar Land Rover over his replica C type
I can send pictures if required
"Recently" is actually a while ago, and after the crowd-funding we are eagerly awaiting the outcome of the appeal. I know of at least one company in the UK that received the "cease and desist" letter and has complied, but I live in France and know of not one company in Europe (apart the Magnussons) who have received the dreaded letter, and going further afield not one company in the rest of the world point point blank. The manufacture of such replicas continues apace in the USA and Australia with impunity it seems.
For the XK120 they never denied the influence of this
Sorry, I swiped the picture from https://newatlas.com/1937-bmw-328-mille-miglia-bue...
Which is another decade earlier and far far closer to the mark.
Sorry, I swiped the picture from https://newatlas.com/1937-bmw-328-mille-miglia-bue...
Which is another decade earlier and far far closer to the mark.
a8hex said:
For the XK120 they never denied the influence of this
Sorry, I swiped the picture from https://newatlas.com/1937-bmw-328-mille-miglia-bue...
Which is another decade earlier and far far closer to the mark.
The XK 120 wasn't a replica of the BMW though, was it?Sorry, I swiped the picture from https://newatlas.com/1937-bmw-328-mille-miglia-bue...
Which is another decade earlier and far far closer to the mark.
Being "influenced" by something, is not the same as being a replica of something.
The Bitter SC was "influenced" by the Ferrari 365 GT4 2+2/400/400i/412i, but it wasn't a replica:
Jaguar/Land Rover are going after the manufacturers of replicas - Something that Ferrari have done on many occasions
(Strangely though, Ferrari don't seem to be going after GTO engineering, and their fake 250 SWB's and such like! )
craigjm said:
4rephill said:
(Strangely though, Ferrari don't seem to be going after GTO engineering, and their fake 250 SWB's and such like! )
Not that you know of. Any company dealing with being served a cease and desist notice would be mighty foolish to talk about it publically hidetheelephants said:
craigjm said:
4rephill said:
(Strangely though, Ferrari don't seem to be going after GTO engineering, and their fake 250 SWB's and such like! )
Not that you know of. Any company dealing with being served a cease and desist notice would be mighty foolish to talk about it publically hidetheelephants said:
craigjm said:
Because any cease and desist legal action will explicitly state that you can’t so if you do you will damage any kind of defence that you may feel you have
What's the law on that? Seems a bit like a self-licking ice cream.craigjm said:
and the complainant can show that you have tarnished their reputation through disclosing details of their actions.
Why would it tarnish their reputation, if they're in the right?I don't see how a company or individual can believe it's legally and morally correct to send a C&D for someone infringing their IP, and at the same time be concerned that people knowing they're doing so would damage their reputation.
I think some of the posts in this very thread have highlighted that reality.
However, what's the benefit of a business announcing the receipt of such an action and scaring away customers who hadn't fully appreciated that what someone was attempting to sell them wasn't exactly kosher?
In this particular situation it's very unlikely that you could stop everyone around the world from making knockoffs but what the actions do achieve is the redefining and widening of the split between the real thing and the fakes/copies etc. it also helps strengthen the barriers to entry for others wanting to make a turn off the backs of others.
However, what's the benefit of a business announcing the receipt of such an action and scaring away customers who hadn't fully appreciated that what someone was attempting to sell them wasn't exactly kosher?
In this particular situation it's very unlikely that you could stop everyone around the world from making knockoffs but what the actions do achieve is the redefining and widening of the split between the real thing and the fakes/copies etc. it also helps strengthen the barriers to entry for others wanting to make a turn off the backs of others.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff