Who owns the rights to the GT40 Body?

[Chris Martino]

Let me be the first to try and sway the bickering off of Steve's Mk II build post since nobody else seems to give a shit.

My topic question - who owns the rights to the GT40 body? Anyone? They all started somewhere, with some kind of original GT40 for reference if not direct copy of so who is benefiting from all of the moulds out there as we speak? Is it a free-for-all because in my mind, a copy of a copy of a copy cannot warrant anyone from claiming they own the moulds. You copy and sell, you run the risk of someone else copying and selling - and so on.

This is a slippery slope to walk, just recall what almost became of the Cobra replica industry just recently when Mr. Shelby stepped forward with palms up.

Chris

 

[roaldin]

Now let's hope the other gentlemen involved in this discussion can see their way clear to move in here.

Let the fun begin.

I just hope it doesn't further ruin the future for such replicas.

Tim.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

I'm here and waiting.

 

[Fran Hall RCR]

Safir has laid claim to the shape but Ford is disputing.....official???

 

[CraigB]

Who owns the rights??

To put my half penny's worth in, I would imagine that any rights probably remain with Safir Parts (Ohio I think), I gather that it was these "gents" that did not allow Ford to use the GT40 name for the "New GT".

I have heard (although I stand to be corrected) that Safir got the rights to the name and body and then "sold" them onto Safir Parts in the late 80s.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Chris M, I would think the answer to your question is one of the following,
Ford, Safir, Lola, Eric Broadly, John Wyer or Roy Lunn.

 

[Keith]

Hey Chris, with respect I don't think that this is the issue here, and if you're trying to start a completely new thread on a different subject altogether I apologise.

This sort of thing happens all the time in the boat building industry with people "splashing" competitors hulls and claiming it to be their own.

GT40 body shapes have been copied and copied again and no-one can claim that any particular GT40 shape is "theirs" apart from Ford and the other parties previously mentioned.

The issue seems to be revolving around a tacit trade agreement between 2 parties which, some feel, has been broken by one of the parties by the production of a body shape "splashed" from the body of the "original" produced by the other party. That's it, endof and any discussion about who owns the rights to GT40s shapes can change any of that.

In the boat building industry, anyone who copies anothers work without giving credit are "sent to Coventry" (Brits will know what this means) and labelled as Charlatans. Don't know who is right or wrong in this case, but I can quite understand why feelings run high.

My 2 cents....:squint:

 

[roaldin]

Further to the question, what is the situation with other replicated parts, eg wheels, rocker covers etc?
Are licenses held for these products (and the rest) or is it unnecessary for some reason?
What is the situation when a copy is made of a copy? Does one copier pay the other and one or both pay the originator or rights holder?

I am not on any side in this as I don't understand all the circumstances but these questions have bugged me for a while. I haven't broached it before as it seemed likely it was some sort of gentlemans agreement or "too hard basket" effect whereby small quantities are "overlooked", and I thought that perhaps keeping quiet was the accepted policy. This seems to be a good place to ask as the worms are already out of the can.

My vested interest in this is only that I am an end user with an eye on costs.

Tim.

 

[CliffBeer]

Guys, to answer this question requires a healthy dose of precision. What's being asked here is a complex legal question. Consequently, the answer is not a simple answer.

To put some context to it, I would suggest that what is being asked is:

1) does some party own a specific legal right,
2) which is exclusive to that party??

"Legal rights" in this context generally take the form of either patent, trademark or copyright rights. Under US law (and under most intellectual property treaty-type agreements outside the US), both patent rights and copyright rights generaly expire after some period of time - typically less than 20 years. Trademark rights generally don't expire in this same manner and can be maintained by the holder. The holder of these various rights can license on an exclusive (exclusive to the holder) or non-exclusive basis, or, even sell such rights, assuming the right has not expired.

When we speak of 'gt40 bodies" we should be precise about whether we speak of the use of the name "gt40" or the physical shape of the body - the name and the body will not be protected under the same legal right. Likely, the body shape is not protected at all as trademark or copyright would not apply here and it's doubtfull a patent was ever granted on the original shape (or that a patent would still be in force after so many years). However, the name gt40 is likely protected under trademark, and, it has probably been sold or licensed by a variety of parties over time. As suggested above, Ford may not hold trademark rights to "gt40" as if they did then there would probably be some reference to it with regard to the new Ford GT supercar.

So, net, I would think that just about anyone is free to splash a body and then mold it up and crank out some commercially salable panels. However, I would think that a party would have to be careful about using the name "gt40" in connection with a commercially salable item unless it is clear that the party owns a trademark right (outright or license).

There is another legal doctrine called "fair use" which tends to grant some more freedom to users of trademarked names where the name is widely used in public but that's going a little beyond the basic scope here.

You asked a complex legal question so you get a complex legal answer.....

 

[Steve Kulper]

Cliff,
I thought a body would be subject to design right, in saying that a design right would have run out by now. People have splashed Lamborghini and ferrari bodies for years and call them replicas, I believe if you call something a replica then you can use the shape as long as you don't claim it to be original.

Steve

 

My thanks to Chris Martino for starting the new thread the point here is Ford and Goodwood commissioned me to make a completely new MK11 style rear clip. I manufactured this rear clip completely myself from photographs and 18th scale model. Once the plug mould was made Doug Nye inspected it to see if it would pass the scrutiny of the general public 60 meters below. Doug was happy and Ford gave me the go ahead to find three MK1 replicas to convert at Fords cost i.e. new paint work new body work (rear clip scoops and MK11 styled nostril) and new tyres. MDA supplied two GTD cars and Simon Kelly supplied the other.

These cars gained fame from the festival of Speed and were invited back to the Revival in the same year. Mark Sibley asked me would I agreed to supplying him with my MK11 body sections for any future MDA customers, I agreed and he put the agreement on his web site.

I used bondo, wood and aluminium to make the Buck mould into the desired shape, it was bloody hard work and took weeks to do and many late nights. Once the plug was complete I then made a production mould from it and produced the three rear clips for the goodwood cars.

All this happened because there were no original MK11 cars in the UK at the time, my plug is only three years old and still my commercial design and is unique to me.

So do you think its right for MDA to have splashed my design?

Regards

Chris Melia.

 

My Plug moulds

 

[CraigB]

Nice photos, I see your air scoop intakes on the inside of the clip are oval and Steve's are more of a parallelogram, which one was correct on the Mk.II?

 

The oval holes were blanked off during the moulding process and then re cut to the rectangular shape as can be seen on the goodwood cars.

regards

Chris.

 

[John W]

Chris,
personaly, no, I don't think it is acceptible for MDA to 'splash' your moulds.

From what you say, you made the moulds to fulfill a requirement for FORD, and not MDA. They (MDA) supplied two cars minus a clip to be used in the static displays, so have not employed you to make them, and have no right over them. Following on from this MDA agreed for you to supply these rear clips to them for prospective mkII customers.
Now they have copied them and cut you out of the business.

If this were any other business this practice would not be acceptible, so why should it be here ?

Do you have a signed agreement or contract with MDA ?
If so, you have grounds for a claim.

If however you don't, and MDA have revised your moulds in some way, I'm not sure how you stand from them using your clips as a basis for their new ones. If you can prove they used yours as the pattern, you must have some comeback, regardless of copyright, or trademark, purely on that fact.

This all shows a very low level of professionalism, and I'd think twice about dealing with a company who are so ready to blatantly stiff another company in the same business.

 

[CliffBeer]

Cliff,
I thought a body would be subject to design right, in saying that a design right would have run out by now. People have splashed Lamborghini and ferrari bodies for years and call them replicas, I believe if you call something a replica then you can use the shape as long as you don't claim it to be original.

Steve

Steve, I'm not sure what you mean by "design right." The only three legal rights relevant to this thread are are patent, copyright and trademark. There is no legal "design right" or something similar.

As discussed in my post above, you are correct, there should be no problem copying the design (because no patent right currently exists) so long as respect is given to not using a potentially protected trademark such as "gt40."

 

hi John

Thanks for your reply.

Hi Cliff

this falls under UK Interlectual Property Law which differs from the USA,

Hi Steve

I have no problem with you and wish you all the best with your build, it would be nice to see more photos of your cars rear clip for comparison please


regards

Chris.

 

[Keith]

Again, in the boat building industry, production of the actual or pictures of the plug moulds or plugs can prove who is in the right as Chris Melia has done here. I presume of course that if MDA in fact did produce their completely independently manufactured rear MKII clips, then they'd have similar pictures of their own, different designs.

Like i said earlier, this is not about the GT40 design rights, it is about the (alleged) plagiarism of someone elses work and subsequent "passing off" which I think is the correct legal term.

 

RaceZone, I cast a moulds off an original MKII nose and tail ( with permission from the owner ) and the air in-let holes were not oval ( like the MKI ) but more square or parellelogram. I believe the MKII tail came from Shelby and the nose from Holman & Moody originally. They were in terrible shape when I got them and took a tom of work to get straight. The trick was not to change them too much or at all when casting moulds.
This is an interesting thread! I have to deal with this sort of thing every day and have been for the past forty four years. I find that there is no protection in this business. I can make a GT body, sell it, and that person can make moulds off it and go into business tomorrow selling the same body as I make. one example; aircraft parts I use to make for an aerobatic airplane. there must be ten people around the world making parts that I originally made. Not many people are willing to sign a " No Compete Contract".
I had one person call and wanted to buy a MKI body and said right up front, that he was going to make moulds off my body and send them to China to have the bodies mass produced! Two hundred per year! Gee! thanks for being so honest!
Chris, too bad you didn't know I had a MKII tail, I could have saved you a lot of work!
The MKI nose and tail I make are exact original. The owners of the original pieces gave me permission to cast off them, but that's great between us, it still doesn't stop anyone from casting off the bodies I make. I don't see a solution to this situation!

 

To answer the question, I don't think FORD owns the shape of the GT40. How could they? They changed the shape many times over the life of the GT. They would have had to copy-right, trade mark or whatever each shape.
In the seventies, I got into a law suit with a customer of mine for not paying his bill. I made him a CNAM body for his F5000 car. Pay-up time, he thought putting my name on the side of the car was payment enough. Part of the law suit was he suied me for copying his race car design for my business logo and letter head. My logo was a graphic head on shot of a 917. He tried to prove that my logo was a copy of his Chevron B16. I showed the judge pictures of a 917, Chevron B16, GT40 MKI MKII, Lola T70 MKIII Coupe, Ferrari 512 and a few others. The judge said they all looked the same to him. It's a generic shape! He threw that part of the suit right out.
This guy also tried to show the judge that I prevented him from winning the Indy 500. Ya! right! with a CANAM car! You can suit anyone for anything in this country. I won and got my money!