[Lucky@LeMans]

Originally Posted by Mitchelkitman

I'm convinced with the pile of bricks as a work of art and the pile of bricks as a building in the making, however, to make the analogy with cars is IMHO stretching it a bit too far. Yes, the main purpose (it could be argued) of a car is to transport from A to B, but the styling is (to most of us) an important part of the package. The argument (IMHO, and I am not a lawyer) should be based on whether the manufacturer (be it F or whoever) has lost revenue in some way - I venture to say that most (not all) replicas or homages cause no financial or other damage to the original manufacturer at all - more so when the model in question has not been made for many years.

When is something art and when isn't it ? The bricks analogy was used by the courts and was upheld.