4 ms·

My understanding is that you are allowed to sell copies of a car, as long as you don't advertise it as the thing you're copying, except for anything that is pat

My understanding is that you are allowed to sell copies of a car, as long as you don't advertise it as the thing you're copying, except for anything that is patented, for which you need to get a license. That's the point (or one of them) of a patent, to prevent people from making legal copies for a time period as a reward to the inventor and promote invention of novel things. Isnt that what this was about? The very bad Ferrari stickers instead of emblems worked in favor of the person sued, but if there was something indicating it absolutely wasn't a Ferrari there wouldn't have been any question at all.

Retric 3y ago
Patents, trademarks, and copyright can all be issues with making duplicates of something. Making and selling “Fake” handbags which you make really clear are fakes can result in prison. The concern are twofold, someone buying it may try and resell the items as “real” or someone seeing a poor copy with another brands trademark on it can dilute the brand. This is less of a concern if the item looks nothing like any of the actual products and isn’t being sold. Tie-dying a 5$ tote bag and stenciling Chloé, Burberry, Gucci, and a few other brand names at the same time is clearly not trying to be a fake.
- kbenson 3y ago
  > Making and selling “Fake” handbags which you make really clear are fakes can result in prison. The concern are twofold, someone buying it may try and resell the items as “real” or someone seeing a poor copy with another brands trademark on it can dilute the brand. I'm pretty sure the issue there is whether the item itself advertises that it is something it's not, even if you're clear it's not a legitimate copy, and also whether you are doing it in furtherance of a crime. Making knock off Gucci bags and selling them as fakes when you're sure they're being bought by middlemen to sell as authentic (at least when your main purpose is to sell to this market and they can "prove" it), could possibly make you complicit (depending on what they can show in court). In that specific case, even leaving off any branding (to make it easier for someone to add fake branding later) could possibly be found complicit, if they could prove that it was for the purpose of furthering the crime (as I understand it). I'm not going to act like companies and prosecute rs don't overstep their bounds/rights/authority, but I think it's pretty clear why some of these cases and laws exist (even if we might think they aren't quite the right response to the problem in some cases).
the_mitsuhiko 3y ago
In case of Ferrari what you can do with the car is quite restricted. They even restrict car resales or any modifications. I'm not sure by what legal means, but you're probably signing some contract that is far reaching.
- Simulacra 3y ago
  Even still, I don't see how that would survive the first sale doctrine. My guess is that no one has ever fought Ferrari on this point.
  - the_mitsuhiko 3y ago
    I am not sure how Ferrari enforces it but since customers are in need of official servicing, Ferrari has plenty of ways to enforce their rights. They can just refuse servicing the car or selling parts to the unacknowledged second hand buyer which can reduce the value greatly.

Retric 3y ago

Patents, trademarks, and copyright can all be issues with making duplicates of something. Making and selling “Fake” handbags which you make really clear are fakes can result in prison. The concern are twofold, someone buying it may try and resell the items as “real” or someone seeing a poor copy with another brands trademark on it can dilute the brand. This is less of a concern if the item looks nothing like any of the actual products and isn’t being sold. Tie-dying a 5$ tote bag and stenciling Chloé, Burberry, Gucci, and a few other brand names at the same time is clearly not trying to be a fake.

kbenson 3y ago
> Making and selling “Fake” handbags which you make really clear are fakes can result in prison. The concern are twofold, someone buying it may try and resell the items as “real” or someone seeing a poor copy with another brands trademark on it can dilute the brand. I'm pretty sure the issue there is whether the item itself advertises that it is something it's not, even if you're clear it's not a legitimate copy, and also whether you are doing it in furtherance of a crime. Making knock off Gucci bags and selling them as fakes when you're sure they're being bought by middlemen to sell as authentic (at least when your main purpose is to sell to this market and they can "prove" it), could possibly make you complicit (depending on what they can show in court). In that specific case, even leaving off any branding (to make it easier for someone to add fake branding later) could possibly be found complicit, if they could prove that it was for the purpose of furthering the crime (as I understand it). I'm not going to act like companies and prosecute rs don't overstep their bounds/rights/authority, but I think it's pretty clear why some of these cases and laws exist (even if we might think they aren't quite the right response to the problem in some cases).

the_mitsuhiko 3y ago

In case of Ferrari what you can do with the car is quite restricted. They even restrict car resales or any modifications. I'm not sure by what legal means, but you're probably signing some contract that is far reaching.

Simulacra 3y ago
Even still, I don't see how that would survive the first sale doctrine. My guess is that no one has ever fought Ferrari on this point.
- the_mitsuhiko 3y ago
  I am not sure how Ferrari enforces it but since customers are in need of official servicing, Ferrari has plenty of ways to enforce their rights. They can just refuse servicing the car or selling parts to the unacknowledged second hand buyer which can reduce the value greatly.