Ferrari 360 Limo - Very well done.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by fisetdavid26

I consider it to be a fake Ferrari and hope it'll never receive any kind of certificate. It was a 360 Modena, and it was a genuine Ferrari. Now it's just a shame on wheels unfortunately bearing Ferrari badges.

if you had said that in stead of : Well...duh...

[Rockefella]

You guys freak out too much over these things. There are an assload of 360's in the world. I'm sure one limosine couldn't hurt the ferrari populous too bad. If it was an Enzo or Ferrari 250, then maybe it'd be different but this is their bread and butter car.

[Ferrer]

Originally Posted by Rockefella

You guys freak out too much over these things. There are an assload of 360's in the world. I'm sure one limosine couldn't hurt the ferrari populous too bad. If it was an Enzo or Ferrari 250, then maybe it'd be different but this is their bread and butter car.

If it was an Enzo it'd be great. One less Enzo is always a good thing...

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Rockefella

You guys freak out too much over these things. There are an assload of 360's in the world. I'm sure one limosine couldn't hurt the ferrari populous too bad. If it was an Enzo or Ferrari 250, then maybe it'd be different but this is their bread and butter car.

the issue is whether the "constructor" is allowed to continue to use the Ferrari badges "proving" that it is still a Ferrari. People unfamiliar with this sort of car vandalism will take it as a Ferrari which it clearly is not.

[70cuda88]

its still a Ferrari, Ferrari may not claim it, but it will always be a Ferrari. i dead Ferrari is still a Ferrari

EDIT: is that a record for 5 Ferrari's is two sentences?

[Coventrysucks]

Originally Posted by henk4

and right they are.

Under what laws?

They sell cars, not a license to their trademarks.

"Ferrari will take the required steps to protect the heritage of the brand and the integrity of our products."

Coming from a company that is more than happy to sell you a Ferrari candle, beach towel or fridge magnet?

Perhaps their lawyers & marketing people should pay more attention to the damage Ferrari is doing to its own "heritage" rather than trying to sue the people buying their cars for having the indecency to treat them as their own property, especially after they have told those people that they can "do what they like" with their car.

I see no cases being brought against the likes of Prodrive for "illegaly" (by Ferrari's standards) building "Ferrari" race cars, or any other number of tuning companies offering modified "Ferraris" for sale.

In 1000 years time, archeologists will find references to the Legendary German company known as Ferrari, and deduce from their findings that this company was apparently one of the largest and most well known manufacturers of baseball caps and T-shirts, as well as being a reknowned "Shoe-maker", apparently.

[fisetdavid26]

Originally Posted by Coventrysucks

In 1000 years time, archeologists will find references to the Legendary German company known as Ferrari, and deduce from their findings that this company was apparently one of the largest and most well known manufacturers of baseball caps and T-shirts, as well as being a reknowned "Shoe-maker", apparently.

Except said products are mostly made by Puma, not Ferrari themselves. As far as I know Puma is a well-reknowned shoe-maker

Originally Posted by henk4

if you had said that in stead of : Well...duh...

I'm lazy sometimes...

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Coventrysucks

Under what laws?

They sell cars, not a license to their trademarks.

"Ferrari will take the required steps to protect the heritage of the brand and the integrity of our products."

Coming from a company that is more than happy to sell you a Ferrari candle, beach towel or fridge magnet?

Perhaps their lawyers & marketing people should pay more attention to the damage Ferrari is doing to its own "heritage" rather than trying to sue the people buying their cars for having the indecency to treat them as their own property, especially after they have told those people that they can "do what they like" with their car.

I see no cases being brought against the likes of Prodrive for "illegaly" (by Ferrari's standards) building "Ferrari" race cars, or any other number of tuning companies offering modified "Ferraris" for sale.

In 1000 years time, archeologists will find references to the Legendary German company known as Ferrari, and deduce from their findings that this company was apparently one of the largest and most well known manufacturers of baseball caps and T-shirts, as well as being a reknowned "Shoe-maker", apparently.

if you reread your post carefully, you will notice that your second sentence is wrong. They do sell licenses to their trademarks...(you may remember the stir caused by the deal with Mattel when they received the exclusive right to produce miniature Ferraris).
It is a grey area for sure, but your example about the Prodrive cars ignores that the cars were changed in the "spirit" of a Ferrari and not turned into something that Ferrari greatly prefers not to be associated with...

[Coventrysucks]

Originally Posted by henk4

if you reread your post carefully, you will notice that your second sentence is wrong.

Only in absolute, general terms.

Specifically related to car sales; you buy a car from them, not a limited licence to use the trademarks and intellectual property - they have absolutely no control over anything you do with the car after purchase.

Originally Posted by henk4

It is a grey area for sure,

There is no grey area at all.

It is called "copyright", not "modifyright".

He is not "copying" any Ferrari designs, he is merely incoporating Ferrari components into something new.

If he puts Recaro seats in, and used Pirelli tyres and Mobil oils; can they sue him for "trademark infringement too?

No different than him using a Ferrari engine, gearbox, door handle or any other part from a Ferrari.

Originally Posted by henk4

something that Ferrari greatly prefers not to be associated with...

Well, as I said, Ferrari is happy to be associated with cheap fridge magnets and book-marks, so they aren't in a strong position to argue that a limo is what "cheapens" their image.

The reason they didn't sue Prodrive is the same reason I don't think this case will progress beyond "threatening" legal action - what he has done is not illegal.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Coventrysucks

Well, as I said, Ferrari is happy to be associated with cheap fridge magnets and book-marks, so they aren't in a strong position to argue that a limo is what "cheapens" their image.

The reason they didn't sue Prodrive is the same reason I don't think this case will progress beyond "threatening" legal action - what he has done is not illegal.

I don't think a fridge magnet will be mistaken for a car. I also think they never sued Michelotto, Koenig or any other who tried to improve on the essence of a Ferrari. This clearly is a different case, this guy has produced a vehicle that in now way represents a Ferrari but still he is labeling it as one, whereby the "value" of his product piggybacks on the name Ferrari.

[Wouter Melissen]

Originally Posted by Coventrysucks

There is no grey area at all.

It is called "copyright", not "modifyright".

He is not "copying" any Ferrari designs, he is merely incoporating Ferrari components into something new.

If he puts Recaro seats in, and used Pirelli tyres and Mobil oils; can they sue him for "trademark infringement too?

No different than him using a Ferrari engine, gearbox, door handle or any other part from a Ferrari.

They don't mind him using Ferrari components; they don't want him to label the finished product as a Ferrari. If you'd take parts from a Recaro seat and fit them on your own seat and then brand it as a Recaro seat, I am sure they will be just as upset.

[Wouter Melissen]

Originally Posted by henk4

I don't think a fridge magnet will be mistaken for a car. I also think they never sued Michelotto, Koenig or any other who tried to improve on the essence of a Ferrari. This clearly is a different case, this guy has produced a vehicle that in now way represents a Ferrari but still he is labeling it as one, whereby the "value" of his product piggybacks on the name Ferrari.

I think many of the 'tuned' Ferraris no longer feature the badges. At least not when sold to customers. Maybe they were supplied separately, but Ferrari has always been strict about this. Take the 'Breadvan' for examples. That was not allowed to run with Ferrari badges and logos.

[Coventrysucks]

Originally Posted by henk4

I also think they never sued Michelotto, Koenig or any other who tried to improve on the essence of a Ferrari. This clearly is a different case...

No it isn't - it is the same thing - take a Ferrari, tinker with it.

You can't go basing any legal aspect on simply whether you happen to like the end result.

Originally Posted by Wouter Melissen

They don't mind him using Ferrari components; they don't want him to label the finished product as a Ferrari.

I am not saying they have to like it, just that there is no basis upon which they can sue him for "trademark infringement", just because he has modified one of their products.

I have modified my PC at home with a new PSU, graphics card, CPU cooling and DVD drives.

Am I now not allowed to advertise the computer for sale second-hand as a "Mesh PC"?

Or do I need to remove all indication that it was ever a Mesh, and re-brand it as a Coventrysucks Industries product?

Nonsense.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Coventrysucks

I am not saying they have to like it, just that there is no basis upon which they can sue him for "trademark infringement", just because he has modified one of their products.

I am sure you are familiar with one of the more recent famous Enzo conversions, owned by a member of this forum. He had to ask (and was granted) special permission from Ferrari to maintain the Ferrari badge on it.