Quote:
Originally Posted by smash
Really? You believe they employed a designer and let them keep the rights after paying for the design?
|
I've just had a brief look through the legislation again as it was a couple of years ago that I had to investigate my one case of theft of intellectual property, and yes, I believe that Ferrari can employ an individual or company to design them a car and not own the design rights even after paying for the design.
As I said before, the legal side of all this is very complex, but, in a nutshell, when a car company pays for a design what they're actually buying is the right to produce a car to that design, not the design itself. That remains with the original designer, and I concede that in the case of the California Spyder, that is most likely to be Pininfarina, but only if the guy wielding the pen was an employee of theirs.
If he was a freelance designer that Pininfarina subcontracted the work to, an unpaid intern or a partner/director of the business, then the design remains his own intellectual property.
The one case I investigated was decided on that very point. Rather than being an employee, the person accused of stealing the intellectual property had been a director of the company it 'belonged' to when he created the designs, and although he had sold his half of the business to the other director, in law the designs remained his property. That was decided by a room full of specialist lawyers as with an IQ of just 148 it was all way beyond my limited comprehension.
Anyway, I'm not trying to stir up an argument or score points here, I just wanted to contribute what little I know about the minefield which is copyright and trademark law to add to the discussion.
As for DNA, it's a shame if they really have had to close up shop as I rather liked the 2-fifty cal, even if the back end did look very much like the arse-end of an MGB.
Hmm, I wonder who owns the rights to the MGB back bumper design...