View Single Post
Old 15th February 2021, 10:26
NeilF355 NeilF355 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Teesdale
Posts: 230
NeilF355 is on a distinguished road

If you examine the translation of the relevant court papers from the Stockholm district court here will see on page 12 that Jaguar Landrovers claim for the C type (designed by Malcolm Sayers)
“The Jaguar C-type is a physical object which, as a subject-matter
of utility art, has such an expression that it can be identified with sufficient precision
and objectivity. The design therefore enjoys protection as a work of utility art.

In other words they claim it’s design is a work of art similar to the work of artists, composers and writers and as such enjoys copyright protection for the life of the designer and for 70 years following on from his death i.e. till 2040.
This is similar to the approach Ferrari took with the 250 GTO when they persuaded an Italian court to declare it’s shape a work of art. This did not help them however when Ares design took Ferrari to court over it’s plan to produce replicas and won, citing the EU’s Intellectual Protection Office (“EUIPO”) use it or lose it rules.

In my opinion the C type was always designed to aerodynamic principles to make the car go faster around the Le Mans circuit than any other racing cars of the time such as the Porsche 356 SL (or should that be works of art??). I’m sure it was never designed as a “work of art” but just happened to look good.
I hope that this Swedish court ruling is overturned on appeal and common sense prevails but this is the E.U. so I’m not holding my breath.

Last edited by NeilF355; 15th February 2021 at 10:35..
Reply With Quote