Again, as echoed above, something tangible regarding what's actually happened between DNA, Maranello and/or Cosa Nostra Legal Services would be useful.
From experience of having to deal with a legal case involving partners in a design company falling out financially, which led to a technical burglary and alleged theft of original designs from one business partner by another, I can say with some authority that the laws covering intellectual property, design ownership and trademarks are
very complex.
In the case of a company such as DNA/Tribute/Fiorano building visually similar cars to historic Ferrari models, two factors come into play: 1) copyright of the original design; 2) trademark infringement.
Copyright of the original design is currently owned by the individual who can prove they drew the first sketches (or electronic equivalent) and completed the design, and passes on to their heirs for seventy years after their death. That remains true regardless of who employed the designer and/or commissioned the design. Contrary to popular belief, paying someone to design something for you doesn't automatically make you the owner of their design.
So, legally, the right to stop somebody else
copying *the Ferrari 250 Califormia Spyder body shape rests with the individual designer (or his heirs if deceased) employed by Pininfarina to draw the shape when Ferrari commissioned them to create a convertible version of the 250.
As such, it shouldn't really be Ferrari that would bring litigation against companies creating similar shaped cars but whoever penned the shape in the first place.
*To make it even more complicated, minor changes to the dimensions or look of the car - a different nose-cone on a seven, for example, can mean that the design copyright hasn't been breached at all.
If a manufacturer of a historic model from its range designed by someone else brought legal action for breach of copyright a decent lawyer could keep that gravy train rolling for years without a court ever reaching an adjudication.
Trademark infringement, however, is much simpler. Ferrari and the Cavallino Rampante are the registered trademarks of a current business. If you are manufacturing goods, including tee shirts, baseball caps, manbags or cars, and putting Ferrari logos on them without Maranello's permission, you're infringing their trademark, full stop.
As has been rightly pointed out above though, they're more likely to notice and take action if it's a business that's making money off the back of their trademark rather than a man in a shed gluing a prancing horse to his home built pride and joy.
Couldn't be simpler, eh?
Now, anyone actually
know what's going on?
http://www.thedesigntrust.co.uk/desi...signer-makers/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_infringement