JLR Win Copyright on C type

[mgcjag]

Some of you may be intetested......JLR just won a copyright case in Sweden on the Shape of the C type against a one man band manufacturer who just made a copy https://cardealermagazine.co.uk/publish ... cer/215136

[Series1 Stu]

That's a real mixed bag!

Are JLR rightfully upholding the concept of IPR or are they simply a bunch of bullies?

What does the ruling mean for the other manufacturers of C Type replicas?

I assume that the Swedish company did not intend passing off the replicas as genuine so where is the harm, as long as they are not branded Jaguar? Clearly, there is no overlap whatsoever of the markets for aftermarket replicas and the "genuine" Jaguar built replicas so what are JLR gaining from this?

Maybe JLR were afraid that the Swedes would build better cars than them.

I assume a licencing arrangement either failed or was never suggested.

Regards

[Heuer]

Where does that leave all the other C/D Type and SS100 copies?

Oddly they lost the Defender copyright action.

[mgcjag]

As far as im aware there is an appeal......im assuming that an EU ruleing isnt legal in the UK ....my understanding at the moment is that self builders who are not in business to sell on are ok.......but who knows. ...also JLR won this case on "body shape" so how much do you need to be different from an original to be different?......Will have to fit a nice spoiler to mine ...edit...JLR couldnt have taken on any one smaller...just a one man band as far as im aware.....now he risks loosing his business and house i believe.....Steve

[Heuer]

Available to buy later this year, going into full scale production from their factory in Hambach, France:

[mgcjag]

I think they lost that case on "trademark".......i wonder if thats different from "copyright" of body shape that they won this case on.....pluss the guy here was small fry probably didnt have the funds of Sir Jim

[Heuer]

"Jaguar Land Rover lost a U.K. court bid to get the trademark rights for the shape of its iconic Defender SUV, freeing billionaire Jim Ratcliffe’s Ineos Group to go ahead with the Grenadier off-road vehicle. A London court on Monday dismissed an appeal by JLR, owned by India’s Tata Motors Ltd. The U.K. Intellectual Property Office had found the shapes it sought to get protected weren’t distinctive enough. The judge upheld the findings by the IP Office that while differences in design may appear significant to some specialists, they “may be unimportant, or may not even register, with average consumers.”

[christopher storey]

I think the difference between the INEOS project ( which I thought had been abandoned ) and the C type was that the Court held that the design and the shape of the C type was utterly distinctive . The Ineos in contrast seems to have a number of influences - in many ways it looks more like a Mercedes G-Wagen than a LandRover, and in addition there are Toyota influences

Nonetheless, I think JLR have been very stupid over this - at a time when their reputation is not exactly riding high , the action smacks of bullying , and that will do nothing to enhance the already sinking image

[Heuer]

Defender & Grenadier:

[cactusman]

Afraid I rather side with Jaguar having worked for many years in intellectual property although on the patents side. Copyright exists in all sorts of works....printed word, music, images, specific shapes, specific colours...the list is vast. Trade marks tend to be for specific symbols or words/phrases etc, brand names and the like. Companies may spend huge amounts amounts of cash in registering designs, trade marks, patents etc around the world and once granted what ever they have is theirs....
Copying a shape or a design or what ever else is essentially little different from stealing the actual item in the eyes of the law and law suits for infringement can run to hundreds of millions. Yes...I agree there is a vast difference between copying something by the million and making a one off in a shed but in the eyes of the law the difference is marginal.
How some Companies have survived so long making copies without issue only JLR can answer...either they chose not to enforce copyright or maybe they were approached first and asked....and said OK. I can only assume that JLR are now enforcing they copyrights as they are perfectly entitled to do.
The key thing here is to ask first as copyright does not last for ever in most cases. Some companies may say yes if the design is old. Some may say yes with caveats. Some may say no....try making a Coca Cola (Registered trade mark) shaped bottle....actually dont!
Intellectual property is HUGE business and companies such as Dyson, Apple, SamSung to name but three, are extremely aware of the value of their IP. I presume JLR are moving that way.
Incidentally France now has extremely strict laws on fakes and dodgy copies. Bring a fake Rolex through customs that cost £50 from the chap in the pub and French law now says the fine can be at least the cost of the real item....so if your fake Rolex was a copy of a £50k real one expect a HUGE fine....technically the same could apply to a C type copy ....The fine would be based on the original cost I presume....although JLR continuations are over a million....oh and they confiscate the copy and destroy it too

[Series1 Stu]

I think pretty much all of that is correct, Julian. I have previously worked for a highly litigious company that defended its intellectual property to the extreme. My colleagues and I spent years fighting Far Eastern copyists and home grown patent infringers.

One case was so big that the damages awarded us would have wiped out the UK based competitor to the point where we could have demanded the keys to their factories. However, we didn't enforce the full award because of the message it potentially would have sent to the market, among which counted some major household brand names.

So, in short, just because you can do something, doesn't mean you always should. As Christopher said, it smacks of bullying.

Regards

[cactusman]

I'd agree with Christopher that, while they won their case, it could be argued that they did not win the PR battle....I'm unsure that their win will be seen by many as good for the brand but there we are....
While the minutae of copyright law is vast, in general it does not need to be registered....Copyright exists as soon as the words are written or the C type shape is made...it.remains in force while the person who created the work lives and for 70 years here in the UK (until recently it was 50 years I believe....that change caused consternation) after their death I believe....so presumably as Malcolm Sayer is judged to be the creator of the C type shape, copyright will lapse on 22nd April 2040...after that date anyone will be able to make the shape
If you missed it Bentley Cars recently lost a trademark case against Bentley Clothing....the car company started making clothes with the 'Bentley' brand to go with their cars. It was found that this infringed the Bentley Clothing trademark....Trade marks are another mine field....they can, as in this case, coexist if their sectors of business are not the same but once the car company made clothes they crossed the line.....all the clothing had to be destroyed.
Just the simple act of copying a piece of prose or a photograph from one website to another on the interweb will technically be a breach of copyright unless the owner of said prose or image has relinquished their right or given you permission to copy....billions of technical breaches of copyright law probably happen every day

[mgcjag]

So as Sayer worked for Jaguar im assuming its Jaguars copyright so does the 70 year rule still stand ?

[steve3.8]

I did suggest this could happen a few months ago -

Quote
"#1 Suffolk Sportscars
Post by steve3.8 » Sun Oct 04, 2020 7:31 pm

The JEC mag arrived yesterday, inside Keith Vincent reported on the threat of legal action over logo's,trademarks & design which sadly ended with Suffolk Sportscars ceasing to manufacture the SS100 .

Is this the start of a distasteful trend ? ------to be rolled out across the c,d,e model range .
Seems a little harsh to single out one company that has been building this model for 25+ years--- or maybe a list of unused SS100 chassis numbers has been found "
http://forum.etypeuk.com/viewtopic.php? ... 00#p135523


It could be that copyright is more easily ruled in Sayers work because the shape is supported by his use of
numerical formula ?

[mgcjag]

Would still like to know how far you need to deviate from an original body shape for it not to be a copyright issue...the C type from Sweeden that JLR won against was as i understand an exact same body shape.......A Realm C replica is 2in wider......a Proteus C replica has a slightly different rear end shape......both easily recognisable by someone who knows what a C type should look like.......your thoughts appreciated.....Steve

[Heuer]

Steve

Did you have or post an article with a list oif all the Jaguar copies that are/have been available or am I dreaming it?

[mgcjag]

I may have posted a magazine suppliment that had a section on each of the replica manufacturers....will try to find it

[mgcjag]

Hi David...start at page 34 shows C/D replicas

[Heuer]

Wow that is going to be a lot of legal action!

[Series1 Stu]

JLR only need one successful action and the rest will probably comply with a finger wag.

I can't imagine it is about damages.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Regards