Ferrari gets revenge on the idiot that cut a 360 and made it in a limo.

[Danny]

A car is a car. Whether it's a Bugatti or a Daewoo, an owner buys a car and thus it is their property and they should be free to do what they want with it. Whether it's turning it into a limo, making it perform better, or adding helicopter propellers.

Ferrari's head is way too swollen if they think that they have any justifiable right to tell an owner (car not leased, but owned) what he can or can't do with his own vehicle.

If anything, I hope that this actually scares potential buyers away from Ferrari due to their limitations on what they'll "allow" owners to do with their own vehicles.

Its a free world, and you can do anything you want to your property (inless in some sort of enforceable contract of course). The point here is not "you cant do that", its BRANDING. They are simply saying "you cant call it a Ferrari anymore".

Now for the people saying "its still a Ferrari Danny!!!!" If I sold you my XBOX, and when you got home you realized that somehow (use your imagination) I replaced the CD/DVD drive with a blue ray drive (cant play games anymore). Remember the XBOX still works, the controllers just move the blueray menus around and stuff. It powers up, looks basically the same, has the same cpu and graphics card (engine and drivetrain) but there is one major flaw in the XBOX i sold you: its NOT an XBOX, because it does not preform and operate as an XBOX should. It now serves a completely different purpose, a purpose Microsoft never intended it to. Now lets use our imaginations a little more, I start mass selling (or somehow elese generate a certain level of public interest) these because its a cheap blueray player. Microsoft would be pissed, I have in some way, shape or form blemished their branding of the XBOX and possibly confused some potential Microsoft customers that the XBOX is no longer a game console.

Not the best example, but you have to remember they are fighting for branding, not ones right to do with their property as they please.

[EJ25RUN]

That would be me.

I understand that it takes a lot to build a performance vehicle that is unique and I give all the credit in the world to Ferrari for their accomplishments. However, for them to take a step this drastic against an owner is just wrong and thus does justifiably tag them as "Elitist Pigs".

Ferrari's only real hand in "upholding their image" lies on their dealer showroom floor. Once someone legally purchases a vehicle and has the title, then that owner should be free to do what he wants with it.

You guys make a nameplate hold too much value. It's a piece of property that this man bought with his money and legally owns. Who's right is it to tell him what he can or can't do with it? It's common sense at it's finest and I'm not seeing a lot of it in this thread.

If I sell my artwork to someone for good money, then they can do whatever they want with it. If I didn't want anything to happen to it, I wouldn't sell it to them in the first place.

Isn't this why Ferrari has such high standards for buyers in the first place? One guy slips under their radar and suddenly they get their panties in a wad. They need to just suck it up.

um.... one is all it takes to open the flood gates.

Ran......I hope your not talking about me and common sense. I have common sense, again im not saying your wrong about ownership.

But if i make something and and sell it to someone. Then they proceed to destroy it, i'll let them know how i feel about it.

Ferrari has chosen to do it this way.

[PlatanoPower]

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.

[EJ25RUN]

Its a free world, and you can do anything you want to your property (inless in some sort of enforceable contract of course). The point here is not "you cant do that", its BRANDING. They are simply saying "you cant call it a Ferrari anymore".

Now for the people saying "its still a Ferrari Danny!!!!" If I sold you my XBOX, and when you got home you realized that somehow (use your imagination) I replaced the CD/DVD drive with a blue ray drive (cant play games anymore). Remember the XBOX still works, the controllers just move the blueray menus around and stuff. It powers up, looks basically the same, has the same cpu and graphics card (engine and drivetrain) but there is one major flaw in the XBOX i sold you: its NOT an XBOX, because it does not preform and operate as an XBOX should. It now serves a completely different purpose, a purpose Microsoft never intended it to. Now lets use our imaginations a little more, I start mass selling (or somehow elese generate a certain level of public interest) these because its a cheap blueray player. Microsoft would be pissed, I have in some way, shape or form blemished their branding of the XBOX and possibly confused some potential Microsoft customers that the XBOX is no longer a game console.

Not the best example, but you have to remember they are fighting for branding, not ones right to do with their property as they please.

No it's a very good example actually.

[EJ25RUN]

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.

[Danny]

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.

[Nemesis]

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.

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.

[OnURleft]

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]

Ran......I hope your not talking about me and common sense. I have common sense, again im not saying your wrong about ownership.

EJ, you're pretty cool with me man. Almost all of your posts make sense and I tend to agree with you on a lot of things. However, there just isn't one point on Ferrari's side that I can agree with in this situation.

But if i make something and and sell it to someone. Then they proceed to destroy it, i'll let them know how i feel about it.

That's fine, let them know! Ban them from buying your product ever again if you want. However, you would have no real right to make legal charges against a man who did something to a product that he bought from you. Once he bought it, it was no longer in your possession and thus not your choice what he does with it.

Its a free world, and you can do anything you want to your property (inless in some sort of enforceable contract of course). The point here is not "you cant do that", its BRANDING. They are simply saying "you cant call it a Ferrari anymore".

This again points back to the elitist attitude that Ferrari seems to have developed. This one vehicle isn't going to suddenly alter the global image of Ferrari. That's like saying a riced-out Civic suddenly turns all Honda's into rice-burning pieces of trash.

Now lets use our imaginations a little more, I start mass selling (or somehow elese generate a certain level of public interest) these because its a cheap blueray player. Microsoft would be pissed, I have in some way, shape or form blemished their branding of the XBOX and possibly confused some potential Microsoft customers that the XBOX is no longer a game console.

If you do this to YOUR PERSONAL XBOX, then Microsoft has no right to seek legal charges. If you mass market them with the XBOX brand, then yes, they can file charges against trademark infringement as you would be marketing a product. However, the fact that your personal item does or does not generate attention is an element of it's own and Microsoft has no right to charge you for it.

Not the best example, but you have to remember they are fighting for branding, not ones right to do with their property as they please.

By fighting for "branding" they are essentially telling this guy that "you can't do this to a Ferrari without penalty", which comes off as complete crap.

[PlatanoPower]

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

[Ran]

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.

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.

[Ran]

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.

[EJ25RUN]

EJ, you're pretty cool with me man. Almost all of your posts make sense and I tend to agree with you on a lot of things. However, there just isn't one point on Ferrari's side that I can agree with in this situation.

That's fine, let them know! Ban them from buying your product ever again if you want. However, you would have no real right to make legal charges against a man who did something to a product that he bought from you. Once he bought it, it was no longer in your possession and thus not your choice what he does with it.


This again points back to the elitist attitude that Ferrari seems to have developed. This one vehicle isn't going to suddenly alter the global image of Ferrari. That's like saying a riced-out Civic suddenly turns all Honda's into rice-burning pieces of trash.

If you do this to YOUR PERSONAL XBOX, then Microsoft has no right to seek legal charges. If you mass market them with the XBOX brand, then yes, they can file charges against trademark infringement as you would be marketing a product. However, the fact that your personal item does or does not generate attention is an element of it's own and Microsoft has no right to charge you for it.

By fighting for "branding" they are essentially telling this guy that "you can't do this to a Ferrari without penalty", which comes off as complete crap.

Ok.... like Danny said im tired with this. This isn't something where one side can win.

Ran, you bring up good points and ill take them as such.

But after analyzing what everyone has had to say i feel that i'll stick to my original opinion.

Just like Danny said, It's the image of what a Ferrari is thats been tarnished.

Yes, he bought the car and yes he owns it.

Here is the best way i can describe it.

The reason i have made as many posts in this thread as i have is because im looking at the Ferrari name.....as an idea.

That idea has been taken by that man and used for something else.

An idea is not a material thing.

That is why, i persist. They don't want him to surrender or destroy the car.

They want the symbol of this idea to be taken of the car.

If you don't get that, i dont know what else to say.

[Danny]

If you do this to YOUR PERSONAL XBOX, then Microsoft has no right to seek legal charges. If you mass market them with the XBOX brand, then yes, they can file charges against trademark infringement as you would be marketing a product. However, the fact that your personal item does or does not generate attention is an element of it's own and Microsoft has no right to charge you for it.

By fighting for "branding" they are essentially telling this guy that "you can't do this to a Ferrari without penalty", which comes off as complete crap.

sorry, ill try to make this my last post. I just could pass up your def of trademark infringement.

I am by no means a lawer, but I have never seen any defenses for trademark infringement (U.S. common law) include:"not mass marketed". I suggest you do a refresher on law.
Please everyone think a little bit more out of the box. Laches is a defense to trademark infringment, and to write this potential (and widley used equitable defense) defense off the list: Ferrari has acted NOW.

Point is we shouldn't act like we understand the law when have zero clue. I know just enough about the law to get me in trouble, but I know enough that Ferrari is doing the right thing. Last thing they want is a army of Ferrari limos running around. So please, try to understand that. And for goodness sake, sign up for a couple law classes.

[Danny]

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."

seriously man, sign up for some law classes. Again, i have never seen this as a defense for trademark infringement.

[Ran]

The reason i have made as many posts in this thread as i have is because im looking at the Ferrari name.....as an idea.

That idea has been taken by that man and used for something else.

An idea is not a material thing.

I think this is where we split. His personal tastes, decisions, ideas, or whatever else do not reflect the original "idea" of Ferrari. If Honda's idea for a Civic Hybrid is fuel efficiency and an owner turns it into a V12 gas-guzzling monster, does that suddenly destroy Honda's "idea" for the vehicle? No. The only thing it changes is this one person's personal vehicle.

They don't want him to surrender or destroy the car.

They want the symbol of this idea to be taken of the car.

If you don't get that, i dont know what else to say.

Once a buyer is the owner of the vehicle, it's not a matter of what Ferrari wants. They can "want" all they want to, but that does not give them legal grounds to force their ideals about what they think is appropriate down upon this man and his vehicle after they've legally sold it to him. He should be able to turn it into a submarine if he wants to. It's not promoting a seperate idea of what an original Ferrari is or was.

Again, I find it rather humorous that Ferrari actually considers this one man's modifications to be a treat to their image.

I know just enough about the law to get me in trouble, but I know enough that Ferrari is doing the right thing. Last thing they want is a army of Ferrari limos running around. So please, try to understand that.

If Ferrari doesn't want bad things to happen to their cars, then they just shouldn't sell them in the first place.

And for goodness sake, sign up for a couple law classes.

I'm pretty sure this is a sugar-coated personal attack, but no thanks. I'd just fall asleep while swimming through all the improper BS. Much like the situation for this thread.



Like EJ said, I'm pretty sure this is a situation where we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I'm pretty sure I understand where you're coming from, but I just can't justify any actual legal action on Ferrari's part. Oh well, my hat goes off to you for the debate.

Here's my vote hoping that Ferrari gets served a nice plate of humble pie.

[EJ25RUN]

tell you what.

Everyone has had their say on this matter.

Let's just see what ends up happening and when can spend 5 pages talking about that.

Fun talking with you guys later/

[Danny]

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.

[EJ25RUN]

One more .....Cause i am Grand Champion

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

[Danny]

tell you what.

Everyone has had their say on this matter.

Let's just see what ends up happening and when can spend 5 pages talking about that.

Fun talking with you guys later/

great call


**unsubscribed**

[Elbow]

i think its kinda dumb that they are suing him. i agree that it looks dumb and i would never do that to the car, but it is HIS car, and if he wants a limo ferrari he should be able to have it.

but if i was in his shoes, i would de-badge it, put if for sale, and then let the next person who buys it put their badges on it, then id buy another ferrari just to piss the company off. lol

another thing, shouldnt ferrari sue the retards who drive nsxs or mr2s with ferrari logos on them? ive seen both around before, and thought it was dumb.

You can't just walk in and buy a Ferrari anymore.

[Ran]

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.

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.

[PURP]

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

[Nemesis]

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.

[Ran]

Ran I really was going to respond with something good, but this threw me off. Like seriously, I lost my entire thought process.

No kidding.

[EJ25RUN]

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

Down Honda boy......Down!!!!

[speedminded]

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).

[Danny]

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.

[LS2ner]

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.

[PlatanoPower]

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.

[VickNotic]

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

[man]

Desperate? What?

From Auto observer.
Ferrari Reports Sales Record for 2007

"Ferrari reported its 2007 sales worldwide grew 14 percent in 2007 compared with 2006, to about 6,400 cars. It was a record result for Ferrari.

Company executives said sales were especially robust in emerging markets. In the Asia-Pacific region sales grew by 50 percent, in the Middle East by 32 percent.

In 2007, Ferrari also created a U.S. branch of its financial services unit and invested significantly in its facilities. The company plans to invest $30 million in its facilities this year."

And India and China are still to hit as hard. On top of that they just took full importing responsibilities of their cars into Japan, Their second biggest market.

Desperate is a word to describe someone doing anything to make money....Aka whoring themselves out. With a sales record, i don't see them being anywhere near that point.

Never said desperate for sales or money, Ferrari isn't really about either.

[scrxils]

drama, drama, drama lol

[EJ25RUN]

Here is an example of another version with a different ending.

This car started out life as a Ferrari ENZO. James Glickenhaus didn't like the styling so he took it to Pininfarina to have it rebodied as this creation.

Now with what yall have read me say, you might assume Ferrari was angry with him. No! Instead the asked him to bring the car to Marenello to have it be officially badged as a true Ferrari and become the only Ferrari p4/p5 in the world.

[MistaCee]

^^ Thats pretty nice

[Malice]

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.

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?

[koukis14]

Here is an example of another version with a different ending.

This car started out life as a Ferrari ENZO. James Glickenhaus didn't like the styling so he took it to Pininfarina to have it rebodied as this creation.

Now with what yall have read me say, you might assume Ferrari was angry with him. No! Instead the asked him to bring the car to Marenello to have it be officially badged as a true Ferrari and become the only Ferrari p4/p5 in the world.

from what I remember reading this car is much lighter and faster than an Enzo.

[koukis14]

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.

After reading your post I caught the stench of vinegar. I am guessing because it was written by a HUGE DOUCHE BAG!!!

[EJ25RUN]

from what I remember reading this car is much lighter and faster than an Enzo.

#1 When you quote someone, Either delete the pics or dont have them show up as such......Makes reading allot easier. If i posted them, people can find them.

#2 Thats not important. I don't think it is anyway.

The point is......

1. Man modifies Ferrari
2. Ferrari find out
3. Ferrari ask man to bring his car to factory
4. This creation becomes official Ferrari and recieves honorary Prancing Horse
5. No lawsuit, just a Creation that applies to the "Ferrari Idea" gets respect from the mother company.

[koukis14]

#1 When you quote someone, Either delete the pics or dont have them show up as such......Makes reading allot easier. If i posted them, people can find them.

#2 Thats not important. I don't think it is anyway.

The point is......

1. Man modifies Ferrari
2. Ferrari find out
3. Ferrari ask man to bring his car to factory
4. This creation becomes official Ferrari and recieves honorary Prancing Horse
5. No lawsuit, just a Creation that applies to the "Ferrari Idea" gets respect from the mother company.

I am so so sorry, it will never EVER happen again MR.Important