(T)Racing Point

[LaurasOtherHalf]

Tracing Point all sounded quite funny back in testing but now Renault are making some pretty serious claims;

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/150550/why-racin...

Not only for Racing Point and their drivers but also Mercedes too, where would this land them should the accusations have something to them?

[Cabinet Enforcer]

The renault appeal seems baseless to me, if they (Renault) can tell that the ducts are the same as Mercedes on the inside, then it was possible for TP to copy them, if however (as Renault claim) it is impossible to copy the brake duct interiors, then how is it that Renault can tell they are the same?

If I was a TP engineer I would have put really obvious mercedes style part numbers on stuff, just to troll the other teams

As for Merc, the article is quite clear that direct sharing of this IP was legal last season, but Renault think that using it this season is illegal, I am not sure about that, sharing this years IP on brake ducts may be illegal, but if last years IP was shared before the new regs came in then I don't see how it can be retrospective, either way Mercedes seem to be in the clear.

The bigger question in relation to Merc is that if they "gave" last years car to TP, what was it that they got in return? The implication in pre-season was that racing point spent their wind tunnel time on merc parts, as that would seem to be the only thing they could possibly gain, and would of course be cheating...

[kambites]

They picked the brake ducts as an example to try to prove the point because they vary dramatically between teams and yet you can't tell from outside observation whether they share an internal design. Hence if they turn out to be the same inside when inspected by the FIA, they have clearly been copied. One has to remember that by the FIA's processes it's not Renault's job to present evidence because that in itself will often be impossible due to IP constraits; all Renault have done is said "we think RP might have done this which is illegal, could you please check".

And yes, it would have been perfectly legal for Mercedes to share brake duct design details of their 2019 car with RP last year, it just wouldn't be legal for RP to use them this year. I suspect that's another reason Renault chose that part - they don't want to drag Mercedes into the argument.

Edited by kambites on Tuesday 14th July 06:50

[coppice]

I mean , frankly , who bloody cares ? If Team A wants to flog a customer car or two , or Team B wants to enter a single car , toe in the water job , or Team C only wants to do half a season then why not ? I you are fast enough , you are good enough .

The Ecclestone era seems to have sucked every bit of spontaneity from the sport , and how ironic that there is noise about one car looking like another when the rules are so prescriptive that , in effect , ten teams are already building the same bloody car anyway

[TwentyFive]

If anything was indeed copied then I believe the Racing Point is actually a great example of why customer cars could be a good thing. Immediately we have a more competitive team and a great midfield fight. But that's another debate.

As for the legality then so long as the IP traded hands in 2019 (which presumably it would have) then RP are in the clear as it was allowed back then.

As for whether it is legal to race those parts in 2020 I am not so sure but I cant imagine how racing a part from 2019 could be seen as a clear advantage in 2020? I could understand if they had copied a part currently present on another 2020 team car. They have copied year old technology, albeit very good tech! I think they have just seen very canny.

Under normal circumstances it would be a disadvantage given a 2020 car should normally be a step forward from 2019. It says more about Renault than it does RP in my view if they are getting beaten by a now year old concept.

[TheDeuce]

kambites said:

They picked the brake ducts as an example to try to prove the point because they vary dramatically between teams and yet you can't tell from outside observation whether they share an internal design. Hence if they turn out to be the same inside when inspected by the FIA, they have clearly been copied. One has to remember that by the FIA's processes it's not Renault's job to present evidence because that in itself will often be impossible due to IP constraits; all Renault have done is said "we think RP might have done this which is illegal, could you please check".

And yes, it would have been perfectly legal for Mercedes to share brake duct design details of their 2019 car with RP last year, it just wouldn't be legal for RP to use them this year. I suspect that's another reason Renault chose that part - they don't want to drag Mercedes into the argument.

Edited by kambites on Tuesday 14th July 06:50

This is my take on it too ^^^

If there is evidence of exact copying that would prove design sharing had occurred, then Renault gain - but only tracing point will suffer. Mercedes will simply lose some standing in terms of credibility.

However, it's: A) highly likely that even with full car design info, TP's designers and engineers would have changed 'enough' to claim each part was unique. B) a given that Renault would make this claim as an explorative measure, regardless of their own suspicions.

C) if Mercedes were in fact complicit in sharing design info, I'd imagine they would themselves have taken steps to ensure TP's resulting car wasn't too close in the minor details to be proven as a direct copy. It's not as if the questions being asked now weren't predictable.

[kambites]

TheDeuce said:

C) if Mercedes were in fact complicit in sharing design info, I'd imagine they would themselves have taken steps to ensure TP's resulting car wasn't too close in the minor details to be proven as a direct copy. It's not as if the questions being asked now weren't predictable.

I don't see why Mercedes would care what RP do with the information; I suppose you could argue that if Mercedes shared it knowing that RP intended to use it to cheat they were complicit in the breaking of the rules and should have informed the FIA but otherwise they have done nothing wrong?

[Mr Dendrite]

Marc Priestly (F1Elvis) makes an interesting point (sic). Worth watching his 10min video on it, although he is a great waffler so could probably have said it in 5mins. He says “This is also about the future of F1 in terms of ownership of intellectual property and how much you spend.
How do get the Board of Renault to sign off on 150million if you can do it a lot cheaper?
He also talks about reverse engineering software from photographs and that there is legal precedent on IP in F1 from a case in the 1970s.

https://youtu.be/whlGwpoWUGk

Edit to add YouTube link

Edited by Mr Dendrite on Tuesday 14th July 09:10

[TheDeuce]

kambites said:

TheDeuce said:

C) if Mercedes were in fact complicit in sharing design info, I'd imagine they would themselves have taken steps to ensure TP's resulting car wasn't too close in the minor details to be proven as a direct copy. It's not as if the questions being asked now weren't predictable.

I don't see why Mercedes would care what RP do with the information; I suppose you could argue that if Mercedes shared it knowing that RP intended to use it to cheat they were complicit in the breaking of the rules and should have informed the FIA but otherwise they have done nothing wrong?

I was thinking from the perspective of Mercedes probably not wanting the reputation for slightly underhanded play. Besides, they have already denied sharing of design info several times. Wouldn't look great.

Agree that technically they have done nothing 'wrong' even if they did share more than they say.

Edited by TheDeuce on Tuesday 14th July 09:17

[kambites]

TheDeuce said:

Besides, they have already denied sharing of design info several times. Wouldn't look great.

Ah I didn't realise that. Agree it would look bad if it turned out that wasn't true.

[waynecyclist]

From Mercedes viewpoint having / helping another team in the mix helps taking points away from other teams.

But if and it is a very big if Mercedes have helped you can be sure zero traceability back to them.

[Deesee]

I thought the brakes were not listed parts until the 2020 season started, so if they are the same (2019 version), then technically no issues, but it seems a bit cheeky by Renault as Merc have to provide a set too, I wonder which parts they will ask for next on the 2019 Mercedes, we might see Alonso in a Merc Chassis after all if they keep this up.

IP in F1 is normally irrelevant, but with a freeze in regs until 2022, why spend money on development when you can just ask the FIA to provide the parts from your competitors!

[996Targa]

"He also talks about reverse engineering software from photographs and that there is legal precedent on IP in F1 from a case in the 1970s".

In the 1970's case, Shadow vs Arrows I think, the two cars were the product of the same designer within a very short period of time.

[kambites]

Deesee said:

I thought the brakes were not listed parts until the 2020 season started, so if they are the same (2019 version), then technically no issues,

No issue for Mercedes, it would still be illegal for RP to have used the 2019 Mercedes IP.

Renault will never get to see either set of brake ducts so there's no direct benefit to them from that point of view.

[anonymous-user]

Cabinet Enforcer said:

The renault appeal seems baseless to me, if they (Renault) can tell that the ducts are the same as Mercedes on the inside, then it was possible for TP to copy them, if however (as Renault claim) it is impossible to copy the brake duct interiors, then how is it that Renault can tell they are the same?

If I was a TP engineer I would have put really obvious mercedes style part numbers on stuff, just to troll the other teams

As for Merc, the article is quite clear that direct sharing of this IP was legal last season, but Renault think that using it this season is illegal, I am not sure about that, sharing this years IP on brake ducts may be illegal, but if last years IP was shared before the new regs came in then I don't see how it can be retrospective, either way Mercedes seem to be in the clear.

The bigger question in relation to Merc is that if they "gave" last years car to TP, what was it that they got in return? The implication in pre-season was that racing point spent their wind tunnel time on merc parts, as that would seem to be the only thing they could possibly gain, and would of course be cheating...

I think you’d have to ask Mr Strulovitch that one. Unlikely it was just money, and as Mercedes may not want to afford F1 after they pocket the championship record, there are certainly possibilities.

[MB140]

Deesee said:

I thought the brakes were not listed parts until the 2020 season started, so if they are the same (2019 version), then technically no issues, but it seems a bit cheeky by Renault as Merc have to provide a set too, I wonder which parts they will ask for next on the 2019 Mercedes, we might see Alonso in a Merc Chassis after all if they keep this up.

IP in F1 is normally irrelevant, but with a freeze in regs until 2022, why spend money on development when you can just ask the FIA to provide the parts from your competitors!

Sorry but my understanding is that the FIA technical boffins will get to see the Merc brake Ducts. Renault most certainly won’t. They will just get a report from the FIA. Stating the result of the investigation. Renault won’t get any sight of what they look like.

[Cabinet Enforcer]

kambites said:

Deesee said:

I thought the brakes were not listed parts until the 2020 season started, so if they are the same (2019 version), then technically no issues,

No issue for Mercedes, it would still be illegal for RP to have used the 2019 Mercedes IP.

Renault will never get to see either set of brake ducts so there's no direct benefit to them from that point of view.

If Racing Point had sight of the Mercedes brake ducts legally in 2019, then the genie is out of the bottle, the Racing Point engineers cannot unsee the design philosophy behind the brake duct and are free to implement their knowledge. Otherwise any part which has transitioned from free to controlled cannot contain any IP from any (other team) source going back in perpituity, if the Racing Point ducts are illegal by Renault's argument then it is highly likely that most other brake ducts on the grid are illegal by the same argument, the difference only being in the extent.

[Deesee]

MB140 said:

Deesee said:

I thought the brakes were not listed parts until the 2020 season started, so if they are the same (2019 version), then technically no issues, but it seems a bit cheeky by Renault as Merc have to provide a set too, I wonder which parts they will ask for next on the 2019 Mercedes, we might see Alonso in a Merc Chassis after all if they keep this up.

IP in F1 is normally irrelevant, but with a freeze in regs until 2022, why spend money on development when you can just ask the FIA to provide the parts from your competitors!

Sorry but my understanding is that the FIA technical boffins will get to see the Merc brake Ducts. Renault most certainly won’t. They will just get a report from the FIA. Stating the result of the investigation. Renault won’t get any sight of what they look like.

Sorry, my point is its not a listed part (the 2020 version would be), Renault will be able to look at the (2019) Merc Part. Anyway the report will be out Wed/Thurs.

Ive seen pictures of the two parts in question and there are remarkable similarities, however the photographers are out (or were out) in between every session taking pictures and selling them to teams, so we should see innovations or similarities in parts over the evolution of a season.


If RP have 'obtained' a CAD file or details of the internals, then they may fall foul of the sporting regs, but not necessarily the technical regs.

[kambites]

Cabinet Enforcer said:

If Racing Point had sight of the Mercedes brake ducts legally in 2019, then the genie is out of the bottle, the Racing Point engineers cannot unsee the design philosophy behind the brake duct and are free to implement their knowledge.

This is just not true. The rules specifically state that for the 2020 cars, the IP for the brake ducts must be solely owned by the manufacturer. As such if it RP's job to make sure that they own the IP behind their 2020 brake ducts; if they don't trust their engineers not to be able to design them because they've seen the Mercedes ones, they should have got different engineers to design them. The very reason Renault chose the brake ducts as the basic for their appeal is that the brake ducts are markedly different between the different teams and they aren't visible from the outside so couldn't reasonably be considered to be in the public domain.

This is basic intellectual property stuff. I've been in the situation in the past where I rightfully have knowledge of another company's product and as such have been bared from working on my own company's competing product in case I inadvertantly pollute our code with their IP.

Ultimately the judgement will come down to "reasonable doubt" in terms of whether any similarities between the designs could realistically be the result of two independent design teams attempting to reach the same goal. What they're looking for is not proof of similarity, there is no rule against two teams having similar components as long as both parties came to that design on their own, but proof of plagerism.

Edited by kambites on Tuesday 14th July 10:57

[Mr Pointy]

There are side-by-side pictures of the ducts in question here:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/racing-point-me...

They do look incredibly similar.