someone chopped a lambo diablo a while ago and turned into a Limo....did lambo sue him?
someone chopped a lambo diablo a while ago and turned into a Limo....did lambo sue him?
Damn, after every post EJ25RUN comes back defending Ferrari.
Stop being a fanboy.
It's not that......Originally Posted by bigdare23
i just figured i'd play defence in this discussion......cause no one else will.
It's like the ESPN show PTI (GOOD SHOW) don't matter if they both feel the same way. One of them has to take the opposing side.
thats dumb...
:idb:
This is absolutely ridiculous on Ferrari's part. If they don't want their over glorified cars modified in such manners then they should keep them to themselves.
At the end of the day the owner paid his money for what is now his car, not Ferrari's.
I'm pretty sure it's not affecting Ferrari in any way except that Ferrari fan boys will e-fight until their elitist arguments are without answer.
For your first post id take the time to read the entire thread through and then make a posts.
You obviously haven't.
I've been following the thread before signing up and I've analyzed both sides to the arguement. The fact is this guy isn't mass producing these "Ferrari limos". He isn't taking it to the track and exclaiming subpar Ferrari performance. He's taken responsibilty for his modification and is quite content with it.
I don't see why you'd be personally upset by this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfX56...eature=related
Exactly.
I find it surprising that Ferrari finds this one vehicle as an actual threat to their image. It's a laughable situation and I laugh at Ferrari.
Ok.. I cant say it any better. Cya, good thread. But i can only say BRANDING so many times. And yet, everyone but EJ25 continues to think Ferrari is sueing on basis of the modification, when they are not. Wake up people, branding is the life blood of any good company, and they do not take it lightly when someone has the possibility of damaging it.
"The 1911 is a collection of subsystems that must work together. Each part must be prepared and fit properly not only in and of itself, but also with regard to the other parts with which it must operate for the gun to function and appear as desired."
Just like taking a photo that has a water mark on it, photoshopping it , and in turn making it look like garbage, but still retaining your watermark.
But what if the owner of said picture you sold openly expressed his responsibility to the modifications?
The guy in this situation isn't proclaiming that this is a crazy Ferrari that they built just for him. He has openly stated that he bought a Ferrari car and modified it to his personal wishes. Anyone who directly connects that as poor craftsmanship on Ferrari's original vehicle is an idiot and probably wouldn't qualify to buy one anyway.
Example:
"I bought this original photo from George, as you can tell by the watermark. However, I did this, this, and this to it to make it how it is now. I'm responsible for the changes."
That's what this guy is saying.
seriously man, sign up for some law classes. Again, i have never seen this as a defense for trademark infringement.
"The 1911 is a collection of subsystems that must work together. Each part must be prepared and fit properly not only in and of itself, but also with regard to the other parts with which it must operate for the gun to function and appear as desired."
I really don't like it because its slow. If it had a pair of Novitec suprechargers and 750hp then that would be tight. Ferrari 360 limo that keep pace with a standard 360
Ran you win. Your blind, and wont listen. You fail to realize that its not the modification that bothers them, its the trademark infringement and their branding at risk that bothers them. Not sure if it was a personal attack, your coming up with senseless defenses that have zero legal grounds. To add to that your being ignorant to the subject.
"The 1911 is a collection of subsystems that must work together. Each part must be prepared and fit properly not only in and of itself, but also with regard to the other parts with which it must operate for the gun to function and appear as desired."
Well, any respect you may have had on my end just got flushed down the toilet. I try to agree to disagree and find a peaceful end, but you throw out some BS like this.
Have fun employing the elitist dictatorship of Ferrari over it's buyers.
Last edited by Ran; 03-14-2008 at 04:58 PM.
One more
User Name Posts
EJ25RUN................35
mushroom_toy........8
Ran......................7
mastakey05...........6
Danny..................6
jesse4846.............5
ATK_Designs..........3
hondachik.............2
PlatanoPower........2
phatboislim...........2
Nemesis...............1
OnURleft..............1
Cool Cat Racing.....1
TehHakingS14.......1
AirBrcak..............1
LS2ner................1
fcman ..............1
bigdare23............1
Gutling................1
90_ZC_HATCH......1
DieselNuts............1
STI101................1
kfzemx3...............1
RUFFIAN..............1
simontibbett.........1
IP37....................1
umairejaz.............1
G.C.....................1
collins..................1
UpSideDownDesi ....1
NAIZBST...............1
who cares its just an over priced piece of shiit that really means nothing.... yeah its carbon everything and 600+ horsepower but thats it and you have to pay 350,000 dollars for that.. take a quarter of that and build a honda, nissan, mazda whatever and you beat it....carbon craetions and other company's make all carbon panels and any GOOD motor work shop can build the **** outta your car for 50,000... think about it you'll save so much money....fuuck the big Italian F
Ran I really was going to respond with something good, but this threw me off. Like seriously, I lost my entire thought process.
Down Honda boy......Down!!!!
You people don't understand, not only the emblem but the shape of Ferrari's and Porsche's are TRADEMARKED. If an owner of a trademark feels someone is degrading their product that they've worked so hard and invested so much into then they have every right in the world to seek action against them.
It's also trademark dilution, Ferrari is known for their sportscars and it's degrading to their vehicle(s).
give it up man. People like Ran are too blind to understand, they think its an Elitist company trying to "hold the man down" when in reality its just trademark infringement (or a host of other legal terms we will let lawyers work on). Its the same people that think you have to profit off something copyrighted by someone else for it to be illegal, they are called morons. And in this case, ignorant morons.
man this thread is just irresistible.
Ran, come on man, i am not personally attacking you. I am defining your actions, which are ignorant and foolish. If you take offense, then prove you want to learn and correct your baseless comments and I will stop calling you ignorant. Till then, thanks for the neg reps lol and i am sorry my negative reps are not as big as yours (damn elitist IA is holding me down, what bull****.. rofl). Oh and I am far from worried about you not respecting me, its a mutual feeling and has been for many posts now.
"The 1911 is a collection of subsystems that must work together. Each part must be prepared and fit properly not only in and of itself, but also with regard to the other parts with which it must operate for the gun to function and appear as desired."
Im still on Ej's Danny and Speedminded side. They arent sueing him for the fact that he modified his ferrari. They are sueing him for the fact that it is no longer the car they built. The car they built was a Ferrari. The car that is being discussed is a limo with Ferrari badging. I respect the fact that they are defending their image and integrity. They ARE an elitist company. They are worldly respected and like EJ posted, they only sold a little over 6000 cars in a single year. This makes them elite. They have legal ground to sue the guy. End of discussion. Regardless if you think its retarded or not, you cant argue the fact that they can and ARE doing it.
On a similar note, i didnt mean i think honda should sue ricers. But they could under the same grounds if they wanted to. They chose not to because of monetary reasons.
Ferrari wagon!!
Oh, I'm sure Ferrari will be suing the owner of this creation as well.
It's sad really that a few members on IA choose to swipe down on other fellow car enthusiasts.
The stench of raw sewage is sure to follow those members around IA with their sticky rotten pride.
Last edited by PlatanoPower; 03-15-2008 at 02:59 PM.
After reading your post I caught the stench of vinegar. I am guessing because it was written by a HUGE DOUCHE BAG!!!Ferrari wagon!!
Oh, I'm sure Ferrari will be suing the owner of this creation as well.
It's sad really that a few members on IA choose to swipe down on other fellow car enthusiasts.
The stench of raw sewage is sure to follow those members around IA with their sticky rotten pride.
Thanks for spewing more garbage on an otherwise logical arguement.
I'd also like to thank you Koukis, a shamelessly rotten individual, for leaving reps
who wouldn't rock a ferrari limo and still hitt'n 175mph ??
i wouldnt buy it, but if given to me free i sure as hell take it in a heart beat... ..
hmm this will surely raise my pu$$y rate 10+ lol
/Oo ___A___ oO\|=_/_______\_=|
drama, drama, drama lol
vtackinn
^^ Thats pretty nice
how ignorant can you be? im really having trouble making sense of this brain vomit... you're not calling the ones who are sticking up for ferrari, enthusiasts? the thing is you're having too much trouble wiping the drool off your face and can't see that it's the principle behind it. making a beautiful car and turning it into garbage just doesn't roll right with ferrari, can't you and all the other dull minded people understand this?
It's a matter of taste. This Ferrari owner decided to do as he pleased with HIS Ferrari.
If his creation leaves the taste of sour milk in your mouth spew it on someone elses post. If you had any sort of reading comprehension skills you'd undertstand the logical standpoint of my arguement.
It's seems as if the true dull individuals fail to understand anything besides Ferrari elitism.
The car came with those badges, is registered under that Vin, and the man payed the rights to that car badges and all. I don't give a $hit what the Ferrari badge represents or how important it is to the company that this man esentialy took the essence out of what the car represents. Yes, some Ferrari owner bought their cars because ALL Ferraris are purebreads and it is a racing pedigree family but ONE limo 360 existing shouldn't lower the whole face of the company. I mean This isn't even the first Ferrari limo and if anything Ferrari should sue the guy who made his NSX a Ferrari F50, or those Pontiac Fiaros with 315 Kits, this whole thing is stupid. Ferrari should let the man be happy with his creation and let him paint it red white and green with HUGE Ferrari prancing horses, Pinifinara (or however you spell it) and Ferrari text, badging everywhere, and let him post it all over the freaking web if he wanted to. It's just ONE CAR with a few badges. He is not selling it claiming it is a Ferrari, he is driving the Ferrari he paid for with heavy modification.
Here are some others I suppose Ferrari is going to sue as well..........
Last edited by 87 Turbo II; 03-16-2008 at 11:27 PM.
^^ Yeah, I drew a frame of a man running on each fan blade. That is him running at idle
you apparently didn't read the whole thread, of course it has to do with taste, something the owner is extremely lacking on. lacking on taste as much as you are brain cells. you're comparing a ferrari and the way people use them to any other vehicle on the road. turning a ferrari into a limo, something totally different, is like turning you into einstein. only an incompetent buffoon could combine words like you...
here's the thing, there is no "logic" behind your arguement. the only thing i can make sense of is that you're apparently unfamilier with the english language and is having to resort on asking your little sister what the "big"(since this is the only way you'd understand what im trying to say) words im typing mean.
why am i not suprised, another ingenious combination of words by none other than you! you're only reading a few words and refuse to see the whole piece of the pie. do yourself a favor and take the time and write up notes from all the other neanderthals that have posted before you. and examine them, then and only then will you realize how stupid your arguement sounds.
I HOPE FERRARI LOSE'S THE CASE AND HAS TO PAY MR. CAWLEY'S LEGAL FEE'S. NO MATTER WHAT THE PRINCIPLE OF A FERRARI IS, HE BOUGHT THE CAR, THUS HE CAN DO WHATEVER THE **** HE WANTS TO IT. IT WILL COST HIM TIME TO REMOVE THE BADGES, AT THE VERY LEAST, THEY SHOULD PAY HIM LABOUR TIME TO REMOVE THE BADGES. IMO THAT LABOUR RATE SHOULD BE $500,000 AN HOUR.
ALSO, I WOULD NEVER DO THIS TO A FERRARI, BUT IT WOULD BE BADASS AS **** TO ROLL UP SOMEWHERE IN A FERRARI LIMO, LOL.
EDIT: KNOWING THE EUROPEAN LEGAL SYSTEM, FERRARI WILL PROLLY WIN THIS. PRIDE OVER PRINCIPLES, LOL....WOW.
THIS ONE GETS A BIGTO FERRARI. I WOULD LOVE FOR SOME RICH PEOPLE TO GO OUT AND BUT THE F430 AND DO THE SAME THING JUST TOO PISS THEM OFF.
1. So does having everything capitalized make your post more important than everyone else's?I HOPE FERRARI LOSE'S THE CASE AND HAS TO PAY MR. CAWLEY'S LEGAL FEE'S. NO MATTER WHAT THE PRINCIPLE OF A FERRARI IS, HE BOUGHT THE CAR, THUS HE CAN DO WHATEVER THE **** HE WANTS TO IT. IT WILL COST HIM TIME TO REMOVE THE BADGES, AT THE VERY LEAST, THEY SHOULD PAY HIM LABOUR TIME TO REMOVE THE BADGES. IMO THAT LABOUR RATE SHOULD BE $500,000 AN HOUR.
ALSO, I WOULD NEVER DO THIS TO A FERRARI, BUT IT WOULD BE BADASS AS **** TO ROLL UP SOMEWHERE IN A FERRARI LIMO, LOL.
EDIT: KNOWING THE EUROPEAN LEGAL SYSTEM, FERRARI WILL PROLLY WIN THIS. PRIDE OVER PRINCIPLES, LOL....WOW.
THIS ONE GETS A BIG
2. You are the twenty second person to say the same thing, it got old on page 3. You saying it on page 7 means nothing.
3. There are reasons why some of us agree with Ferrari and some of us that disagree on this matter.
4. For most of the posts i've read, it seems to me that the people on Ferrari's side are able to bring up more up more facts vs emotional rants. The one exception is Ran. Your post with the cussing and whatnot, really has no value. You basically jumped on the bandwagon and wasted thread space.
5. If you have something intelligent, relevant, or new to say about this issue, then go ahead and find it. Cause im really tired of you, PlatanoPower, 87 Turbo II (I lost respect for his post awhile back).
6. Most of the people involved in this thread decided to see the outcome and comment on that./
I HOPE FERRARI LOSE'S THE CASE AND HAS TO PAY MR. CAWLEY'S LEGAL FEE'S. NO MATTER WHAT THE PRINCIPLE OF A FERRARI IS, HE BOUGHT THE CAR, THUS HE CAN DO WHATEVER THE **** HE WANTS TO IT. IT WILL COST HIM TIME TO REMOVE THE BADGES, AT THE VERY LEAST, THEY SHOULD PAY HIM LABOUR TIME TO REMOVE THE BADGES. IMO THAT LABOUR RATE SHOULD BE $500,000 AN HOUR.
ALSO, I WOULD NEVER DO THIS TO A FERRARI, BUT IT WOULD BE BADASS AS **** TO ROLL UP SOMEWHERE IN A FERRARI LIMO, LOL.
EDIT: KNOWING THE EUROPEAN LEGAL SYSTEM, FERRARI WILL PROLLY WIN THIS. PRIDE OVER PRINCIPLES, LOL....WOW.
THIS ONE GETS A BIGDo you not understand the laws behind trademarks? Just because someone purchases something does not mean they own the rights to it. You CAN NOT legally alter trademarked objects whether you "own" the object or not, especially not when you are doing it to produce an income.
Say you purchased a fountain or vending machine with Coke graphics on it and put Pepsi products in it...Coke has every right in the world to file suit against you. Even though you "own" the machine it's still their trademark so they still have say as to how it is used.
Last edited by speedminded; 03-17-2008 at 04:51 PM.
I Really like this thread. Now, that being said:
So where do NASCAR cars come into this? They're still called "Avengers" and "Camrys", but there's basically nothing connecting the mass-produced grocery getter and the tube-framed, 900HP producing race car.
Also, where do companies like TOM'S, MINE'S and Spoon come into this?
This makes no sense to me. Unless the fact that there were Pepsi products in it somehow tarnished their reputation, what could they do? I could put a "sucks" decal right under the Coke name and they still couldn't do anything about it, unless they want to try to pull something out of their butts like defamation
Well this would be fraud if he was selling it as something only Picasso did, but even though it's a Picasso with some stupid shiz on it that annihilates its value.
But see, that's just the thing: Ferrari builds STREET-LEGAL RACERS AND F1 CARS. That's ALL THEY DO, and EVERYONE KNOWS IT. Nobody thinks that that car would have rolled out of Maranello like that, so they must figure it was done by some idiot with more money than brains. The only way they could claim it tarnished their image is if it makes people believe that they sell to rich idiots, which they do and must know they do, so what's the problem?
I doubt that Nissan thought that their 240SX would become a drift icon, but there it is. Yet they don't think they should sue everyone in Form. D or D1.
I doubt that Ford thought that their Mustang would have a RB26 dropped into it and drifted down a mountain, but it happened, and they haven't taken anyone to court.
If they can prove that because some guy added nine feet to his 360 that people aren't buying F430s, then more power to them. But until then they are being elitist.
"DON'T FLOOD THE CAR PICS SECTION WITH YOUR BULLSHIT
FORMULA D PICS" SQUAD MEMBER
Smartest post in the thread. Ferrari has no ground to stand on and will fail miserably.
/thread
"I'm not a gynecologist... but I'll take a look."
You think NASCAR vehicles aren't licensed and developed by their manufacturer? Do you have any idea about the magnitude and importance of racing to manufacturers? Toyota spends about $100 million a year on NASCAR! Then Toyota has invested $2.5 BILLION in Formula 1 since 2002, "Toyota spends an estimated $400 million a year on its F1 program, but has yet to win a race in five seasons"...BILLIONS from their pocket. Of course manufactures use the names of their street cars TO PROMOTE the sales! Do either have a single bolt in common? Most likely not but it's a marketing investment. Don't say manufactures don't have a stake in the motorsports their cars participate in if you don't know what you are talking about.
When you own a trademark you have proprietary rights to how the product or object is used, period.
If one person does it then another one will...then another...then another. Even though Ferrari sold the car they still have rights to how the car is used. If for instance someone wanted to use a Ferrari in a movie then Ferrari can say no and threaten a lawsuit if they want to. It's not just the Ferrari stable emblem of Baranca's horse that is trademarked, it's the entire car and what is done to it. It may be the owners car BUT it is still Ferrari's trademarked object.
Name a single reason why they should? If it's non-threatening or they don't have a problem with it why should they?
Get your head out of your ass and listen for once. Ferrari owns the rights to how their automobiles are used, how they are modified, etc. If they don't like it they have the choice of a) not giving a ****, or b) requesting it not be done or it will result in them seeking legal action.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark
So let me get this straight: even though I buy some property from someone else, THEY can still tell me "no, you can't do that and we won't let you"? So you're telling me that Ducati could theoretically sue the people behnd the second Matrix because they think that the movie makes people think Ducatis are fragile, even though the girl RAN ONE INTO A F*CKING BUILDING?!
So? You can't stop idiots.
Are you serious? I mean, really f*cking serious? Because that's irrelevant to the problem here. The car is different from what Ferrari made. Point-blank, PERIOD. He has changed it radically from Ferrari's original design. It may not be Ferrari's idea of what a Ferrari should be, but it still has a Ferrari VIN and a Ferrari title, and thus in the law's eyes it is still a Ferrari.
But see, that's just the thing: IT ISN'T. Now, I'll take something from the Wikipedia article you linked to: "A trademark is a type of intellectual property, and typically comprises a name, word, phrase, logo, symbol, design, image, or a combination of these elements."
Does the design of that limo look ANYWHERE NEAR a 360? Sure, in some ways it might, but there's one big thing separating them: ABOUT NINE FEET.
Like I said before, the design is radically different, and thus they have no trademark over the car. Sure, the badges might be the same as the the ones on a 612 coming off the line (which ITE is the reason for this suit), but as I said before it's still a Ferrari in the law's eyes, and a Ferrari badge on a Ferrari is not a trademark issue.
Your head is as far up your ass as my head is up mine! They DO NOT have the right to say how cars that technically ARE NOT THEIRS are used! I see how they could say something about the badges (which is the whole point of the suit), but not the car itself.
"DON'T FLOOD THE CAR PICS SECTION WITH YOUR BULLSHIT
FORMULA D PICS" SQUAD MEMBER
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
