[smash]

Gary - this all from my digging and prior knowledge so that's my caveat!

The 10% rule is a myth (according to UK copyright society). This is about derivative copyright law. The Kali and the Coupe are both derived works from Ferrari. The question is can a derived work have its own copyright? The answer is yes IF it's seen to be substantially different. It's a civil not criminal matter. I'd expect the Kali to be protected but the coupe is questionable - present a photo of a finished car (the No 7 car for example) and then a photo of the original for comparison. Man on Clapham omnibus would think they are the same IMO. I'd expect copyright would likely remain with originators Ferrari and so it would be their call whether they pursued either Tribute or a copy of Tribute. That's the gamble - does the derived work have its own copyright, is it substantially different? You're only going to find that out taking civil action all the way and then the question is does either party have the appetite or financial resource to do that. You can always try a cease and desist letter first as a cheap option and the recipient may bottle it but ultimately it's down to civil action. I guess the tactic for the defendant would be not that they hadn't copied the copy, but that the copy doesn't have any protection in the first place