Magnussons-Jaguar Court Appeal Result
Discussion
thegreenhell said:
Is this the case of the homemade C Type replica?
I found this which is what i am assuming the op is talking about. However is almost a year old. https://porterpress.co.uk/blogs/news/c-type-replic...
There was an appeal against the original ruling, back in January IIRC. I guess they've now published the results.
Any links to any more information?
a quick Google isn't showing anything new and Neville hasn't posted anything yet either.
just in case anyone is interested, but mostly for me so I can find it again easily. Here's the long running thread from when all this started.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
Any links to any more information?
a quick Google isn't showing anything new and Neville hasn't posted anything yet either.
just in case anyone is interested, but mostly for me so I can find it again easily. Here's the long running thread from when all this started.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
Edited by a8hex on Thursday 23 March 17:55
I can't give you all a link because it was in an email - all 61 pages of it! It seems, as things clear, that Jaguar have paid reparations and legal fees, but no one has the right to make the cars commercially. You can still build one yourself though.
But I can't see where this will lead. What purpose serves the right to the copyright if you are never going to build any more cars? They can't be road-registered in the majority of the world and people are still making them for sale no matter what the law says. And as time passes ICE will theoretically disappear, unless logic takes over and we have hydrogen.
But I can't see where this will lead. What purpose serves the right to the copyright if you are never going to build any more cars? They can't be road-registered in the majority of the world and people are still making them for sale no matter what the law says. And as time passes ICE will theoretically disappear, unless logic takes over and we have hydrogen.
Thanks, so the good news is that they aren't ruining the Magnussons.
I look forward to seeing more details as they emerge.
As to the ICE ban, it would stop someone like Jaguar making more clones once the rules come into force but no one else building C-Types is likely to be able to get anywhere near the magic 1000 figure so they should be exempt from the ban thanks to
https://www.pistonheads.com/news/general-pistonhea...
But then I guess since Jaguars cars aren't road legal anyway the ban probably doesn't apply anyway.
I look forward to seeing more details as they emerge.
As to the ICE ban, it would stop someone like Jaguar making more clones once the rules come into force but no one else building C-Types is likely to be able to get anywhere near the magic 1000 figure so they should be exempt from the ban thanks to
https://www.pistonheads.com/news/general-pistonhea...
But then I guess since Jaguars cars aren't road legal anyway the ban probably doesn't apply anyway.
lowdrag said:
.......but no one has the right to make the cars commercially. You can still build one yourself though.
That was the decision of the Swedish court, but does it apply across the rest of the EU ? What about the U.K. ? Great news anyway and I hope that whoever it was in JLR that chose to go down this route, has got his/her P45.
What a PR disaster this has been for JLR and to what end ?
Firstly, a big cock-up on my part. I check exchange rates for $ & £ daily, but when I googled SEK it came up with the full stop in the wrong place, multiplying the sum awarded out of all proportion. As regards other countries, they will have their own laws on copyright but just the same it is curious that the only country where a prosecuction has been made is Sweden.Replicas are still being made in Australia and the USA for example - with no prosecution in sight.
nice1two said:
thegreenhell said:
Is this the case of the homemade C Type replica?
I found this which is what i am assuming the op is talking about. However is almost a year old. https://porterpress.co.uk/blogs/news/c-type-replic...
GoodOlBoy said:
Great news anyway and I hope that whoever it was in JLR that chose to go down this route, has got his/her P45.
What a PR disaster this has been for JLR and to what end ?
The CEO in charge at the time and the director of classic works at the time have both already moved on. The CFO at the time is now acting CEO bit how much I put he would have had who knows. The Chief Legal Officer (General Counsel) joined in September from Tesco so I guess his first job was to sort out the mess. What a PR disaster this has been for JLR and to what end ?
If you want to go further where Jaguar are concerned, you might like the story of Jaguar buying a collection of 543 cars in 2014 from a collector, announcing that this was to be the national collection, and then selling them off piecemeal from 2018 onwards. The paid £60 million and after six months sleuthing I found about £5 million in receipts. And, we know that when starting the court case they themselves owned and had to get rid of a replica C, D, and XKSS used by Jaguar for driving experiences. The XKSS now belongs to Anthony Hamilton I am led to believe, the D-type was sold by Silverstone Auctions, and the C-type? Dismantled by Jaguar and offered in bits to a dealer who refused it at the price asked. Since Jaguar couldn't very well sue people for building replicas and own some themselves it is highly rumoured that the car, worth over £200,000, was cut into pieces and destroyed.No one in the UK would print the article, but it was printed last month in Jaguar Magazine in Australia.
Edited by lowdrag on Friday 24th March 13:05
Along a similar vein, a few years ago I got into an online conversation about Ferrari going after people making replicas, based on the principal of their I.P ownership.
The gentleman I was talking with felt that Ferrari were wrong to go after companies who were making replicas of vehicles that they were never going to build any future examples of, as it wasn't going to affect Ferrari themselves in the future.
The next part of the conversation went along the lines of:
"That's an interesting point to make, because you personally own all of the I.P and image rights to the Ferrari P4/5, not Ferrari, and you've already used your rights to force a computer games company to remove the image of the P4/5 from their game. Now if a company were to start making P4/5 replicas without your authorisation, I'm pretty sure you would send out a cease and desist order, despite the fact that you do not intend to make more P4/5's in the future (unless there's something you might want to tell us all!
)
Mr Glickenhaus was kind enough to concede that he would take the exact same approach as Ferrari (taking legal action to stop any production of a replica P4/5), and that perhaps he wasn't in the best position to argue against Ferrari going after replica manufacturers after all
The gentleman I was talking with felt that Ferrari were wrong to go after companies who were making replicas of vehicles that they were never going to build any future examples of, as it wasn't going to affect Ferrari themselves in the future.
The next part of the conversation went along the lines of:
"That's an interesting point to make, because you personally own all of the I.P and image rights to the Ferrari P4/5, not Ferrari, and you've already used your rights to force a computer games company to remove the image of the P4/5 from their game. Now if a company were to start making P4/5 replicas without your authorisation, I'm pretty sure you would send out a cease and desist order, despite the fact that you do not intend to make more P4/5's in the future (unless there's something you might want to tell us all!
) Mr Glickenhaus was kind enough to concede that he would take the exact same approach as Ferrari (taking legal action to stop any production of a replica P4/5), and that perhaps he wasn't in the best position to argue against Ferrari going after replica manufacturers after all
A brand that has such strong heritage and goodwill with the classic car community certainly did it´s best to ruin their reputation with the Magnussons case. First talking about co-operation and then suing for a single build made for personal use. By acting in such underhand manner they have made sure that quite a few Jaguar enthusiast will not even consider to buy a new Jaguar.
Finlandese said:
A brand that has such strong heritage and goodwill with the classic car community certainly did it´s best to ruin their reputation with the Magnussons case. First talking about co-operation and then suing for a single build made for personal use. By acting in such underhand manner they have made sure that quite a few Jaguar enthusiast will not even consider to buy a new Jaguar.
My experience of “Jaguar enthusiasts” from all the clubs over the years is that the vast majority never have and never would buy a new Jaguar even going back to a time when they were producing cars of their liking. Jaguar, I think more than any car manufacturer I can think of, is in a really strange position where in reality most “fans” of the brand are Jaguar drivers and have never been a Jaguar customer and therefore the company itself doesn’t really have a business relationship with these people craigjm said:
Finlandese said:
A brand that has such strong heritage and goodwill with the classic car community certainly did it´s best to ruin their reputation with the Magnussons case. First talking about co-operation and then suing for a single build made for personal use. By acting in such underhand manner they have made sure that quite a few Jaguar enthusiast will not even consider to buy a new Jaguar.
My experience of “Jaguar enthusiasts” from all the clubs over the years is that the vast majority never have and never would buy a new Jaguar even going back to a time when they were producing cars of their liking. Jaguar, I think more than any car manufacturer I can think of, is in a really strange position where in reality most “fans” of the brand are Jaguar drivers and have never been a Jaguar customer and therefore the company itself doesn’t really have a business relationship with these people I understand that Jaguar wants to stop others from profiting off their brand. What I don´t understand is the underhand and vindictive way they went about it in the Magnussens case.
Finlandese said:
I understand that Jaguar wants to stop others from profiting off their brand. What I don´t understand is the underhand and vindictive way they went about it in the Magnussens case.
Because that's the modern corporate culture of big business....you only have to see how their faceless HR dept's deal with their own staff, let alone people outside the business.Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff