Of course you’re going to have people doing stuff like that. But when you’re putting out as many cars as those other brands, not many people care. Legally, those people can be sued.
FandF for ruining the street scene? How so? If you mean street racing scene, that’s like a coke distributor suing the people he gets his coke from for not delivering.
I may have used to broad of a statement with “ruining the name.” Honda likes the aftermarket, hence why they have the HFP line, Mugen Si, etc… Jap manufacturers enjoy aftermarket support in general, as it also helps sell their cars. You don’t see too many, if any, aftermarket support helping sell a Ferrari.
So Honda can sue you for swapping motors and making your Civic HF have horrible gas mileage because you make over 500whp now and thats not how they marketed it?
So Ferrari can sue the collectors for never taking the car to the track of even driving it? They didn’t build it to be a dust collector, they build it as a race car.
People use products for their not intended use every day, once they buy it, they own it, if you don’t want your product being used for any other person, then have a signed agreement at the time of sale that this product will not be modified in any way non-compliant with the manufacturer.
It’s just as ridiculous as Ford forbidding owners of taking pictures of their cars and posting them online.
You don’t see Hummer, Mini, Toyota, Lambo or any other manufacturer going after the people the stretched their cars, Ferrari just got their panties in a bunch.
It ruined it for those already in it. But made other things explode with attention, such as every teenager, buying parts for there car, not that this wasnt happeneing before, but its happening now at a huge increase than before.
Because only certain people can afford them in the first place, so add you know like 10K or wayy more depending on what you get, to a car that already 125K+. the only reason you see poeple with hondas, nissan, audi, is that there cheap, and easy to afford, and then going over board on parts. If everyone had 1mil at age 16 to start ouy tthere lives, theres only about 10% of people that would buy the cars they have now
Exactly, ford is just stupid to begin with about that idea. I agree the most with, if you dont sign something at the time of the sale then, its your quit bitching because i thought of it first.
None of you guys seems to REALLY be getting what I’m saying. Other manufacturers CAN sue for the same reason, they just CHOOSE not to.
Vlad: You tend to take things to far with this stuff in an attempt to prove you’re right. Those are all Ferrari licensed products, similar to what Porsche, BMW, Lamborghini, Nissan, etc… ALL do. They’re not trying to market their cars, just the products and a lifestyle.
Here’s a simple way to prove my point. The CHASSIS (meaning the CAR) of a regular 360M is made by Ferrari. This guy CUT the chassis in half and made his own. Now he is marketing this car still as a Ferrari, making profits off of it. In a way, it’s a form of slander or defamation.
Just because I put coilovers on my car does not mean it’s not a Subaru anymore. The chassis is still 100% Subaru.
I think Cossey nailed it, they are selling it as a Ferrari and its not. In this country I think your allowed a certain percentage of “other makes” before it no longer is the original make, though I don’t know the specifics. Its England, they have some bizarre litigation, if this took place in France or Italy I know it would stand, we(the USA) tend to be very liberal when it comes to things like this, other nations are not.
As P.T. Barnum said, any advertising is good advertising and the more controversy the better.
Ferrari is a very strict auto manufacturer. When you buy one of their new vehicles you sign a waiver saying that if you sell it within X amount of time of ownership you promise the vehicle back to Ferrari first before selling it privately. This reduces the chance of anyone exporting cars on the gray market. Also, Ferrari copyrights and trademarks their chasis, logo, styling, ect ect and only sell the rights to their own companies (Maserati and such) for platform/engine sharing. Also working with their trademarks of their crest/badges they market several different products…watches, clothes, hats, computers, ect…to promote their brand and they’re exotic/exclusive lifestyle. Porsche is very similar in this regard. They offer lines of luggage/shirts/watches/sunglasses/all sorts of stuff to promote their brand and image. And it’s all trademarked and they receive a portion of all sales related to their brand. I believe it is at this point Ferrari has a problem with someone marketing their brand for a profit and not paying Ferrari for using their trademarked name/logo/brand. On that point, Ferrari does have a valid legal argument and could seek royalities for past monies due. There’s the situation in a nutshell :banana :banana :banana
They might be in their technical right, but after years of having their Logo blasted on anything and everything, and having countless tuners modify them in a way that they don’t have many stock parts left, and having rental companies rent them out to people to make a profit of the name, targeting this guy is just not going to hold up in court.
For example: NYC: Illegal for a man to turn around and look “at a woman in that way”, and violators are forced to wear horse blinders.
Yes it is illegal, but would you be made to wear horse blinders? No.
You cannot just single this guy out.
Can he cut and modify his own car? Yes.
Can he rent a Ferrari to make a profit? Yes, it’s done world wide.
Can he do them both at a time? Apparently not. :confused
What tuners are you takling about Vlad? Several companies who make tuning products for Ferrari BUY cars from Ferrari and with Ferrari’s permission make “performance parts” that are approved by Ferrari for the vehicles. Much as several companies for Porsche (AWE, Evo Motorsports, and to a greater extent Gemballa/TechArt (now SpeedArt)/Ruf) buy vehicles from Porsche and pay Porsche for the rights to make the products for the Porsche family. Notice you see VERY little “knockoff” product support for any high end vehicle for this very reason. The market is very well controlled by the manufacturers so that they can be ensured they maintain some sort of controlled structure.
The problem with transforming the Ferrari goes beyond simply modifying it…he turned it from a PASSENGER vehicle into a LIVERY vehicle. And no, Ferrari wouldn’t sue him for renting out his Ferrari. Several companies even in the US rent high end vehicles to paying customers. However, they are still passenger vehicles. This does indeed make a HUGE difference.
Companies such as Ruf and Gemballa that modify cars so radilly are sold under their own VIN numbers. That’s right, Ruf and Gemballa (and now Brabus) are the only 3 companies in the world who started as tuners but are now giving VIN-less rolling chasis from their respective manufacturers and allowed to build their OWN cars with their OWN VIN numbers. By doing this - they pay their respective manufacturer for teh chasis and all rights associated with it, and then from there they profit once they have completed finishing the car to their own personal specifications.
If you don’t understand this now…there’s really no helping you…I don’t know how else to put it.
We don’t know the whole story, of course it sounds like bull shit, but there are at least three sides to every story. Who knows if some British politician wanted to rent this and this guy wouldn’t cut him a deal, that may upset him enough to put some political pressure on this guy and make his life difficult, we just don’t know what triggered it.
