RIP 1961 250GTE #2709

When you take a GTE and turn it into an SWB, you're not trying to tell people that that is a coachbuilt GTE. You can legally argue that, sure - and that is what I am calling a loophole though our views about it differ - but to a passer by, the replica will be considered an original until they are told otherwise. The law allows the builder to put a Ferrari badge on it, and he doesn't have to say anything else.

I still contend that using an original chassis to build a replica is exploiting a legal "open window" that IMO should be shut.

Modern day coachbuilders still exist (barely). They are called Touring, Zagato, Pininfarina, Italdesign etc etc...

 

Doesn't the fact that it violates copyright/trademark laws make it wrong? Here's what happens when people copy Hermes Birkin bags and sell them on the open market: Hermes Wins $100M in Fake Birkin Bag Lawsuit - Decided -- how is this different from copying Ferraris?

They are NOT coachbuilders. Coachbuilders are artists that design and build unique bodies. The replica manufacturers aren't designing anything, they are copying somebody else's design -- a design that cost the originating coachbuilder a lot of money and time to create, refine, and make production-worthy. They are stealing a design that somebody else had to pay a lot of money to create -- to call them coachbuilders isn't accurate, the only label that is accurate is to call them "forgers".

You say this like it is a good thing, but this use of original Ferraris is the problem. If you overlook the trademark infringement, and the copying and forging of someone else's design, then it wouldn't be any big deal if the copies were based on any mass-production chassis because at least other original Ferraris wouldn't be destroyed. But you have to have pretty big blinders on to ignore those major issues in the first place, and to destroy other irreplaceable cars to create the forgeries doesn't make any sense.

If you owned one of Picasso's lesser works, and you hired a painter to modify it to turn it into a forgery of his greatest masterpiece, is there any way to say this is an acceptable practice? Why would Ferraris be any different? To make any forgery is difficult to justify, but to destroy another Picasso to create that forgery is impossible to justify on any rational basis.

 

As someone currently in the process of trying to sell my freshly restored 330, I find this the most troubling part of letting it go.
After investing three years and a pretty substantial sum, I too would be pretty pissed to see the result "harvested" for the construction of a "Frankencar".

The question I have is, "how do you vet a prospective buyer to assure yourself that this wont happen?"

 

Me, too! And there were a few that made the Want Ads for similar money right here in St. Paul. Not to mention the $15k and the $25K 289 Cobras that I passed on. Or the plethora of E-Types for less than $5K... :-(

 

Your assumption is that the replica owner has commissioned/purchased one purely on the basis of trying to deceive people they don't even know or probably even care about! Do you really think anyone would pay the kind of money the better replicas cost just to impress complete strangers? they do it because THEY like the style/engineering of the particular car and for one reason or another cannot purchase an original.

Your contention is never going to happen, never ever, stop losing sleep over the industry and simply enjoy life, first world problems and all that.

 

Not very good at this multi quote lark so duplicated the reply below as well as within the quote

Ferrari has no copyright on the older models that are being replicated, and the replicas are built to order only, and on existing Ferraris. The Hermes bag copies have no Hermes content what so ever, are mass produced, and of inferior quality to an original. You are comparing apples to oranges.

If any form of theft or illegal activity has taken place then the law enforcement authorities or the country where the cars are converted would come down hard on the companies along with Ferraris lawyers. In relation to Ferrari this only happens in Italy with its unique laws, or where currently protected models are duplicated, these always seem to use non Ferrari donors anyway and are not a patch on the originals.

Coachbuilders are artisans who simply create what they are paid to do, they are also commercial enterprises and I am sure if you rocked up to PF etc etc with a suitcase full of money they would scratch build/convert any car you have, into any car you want whether it be unique or not!


No trade mark infringement or copyright issues are applicable to the older cars, it is completely and utterly legal to do. Again the Picasso argument is comparing apples to oranges, besides if Picasso had pumped out 1000s of copies of a particular painting and one of those examples was tired and worn out, but the canvas still good then where is the harm in getting a fellow painter of equal ability to re use the canvas?

Sure if someone then tried to sell on that painting claiming its an original, untouched work then that is fraud, if someone hangs it on their wall and simply states it is a Picasso canvas that now has a reproduction painting covering it, then no fraud at all.

 

Simply don't sell it then, job done. Well done you for preserving the car for posterity that way. Besides I don't hear of any nice examples being used to produce a replica, why would someone bother paying extra for a great example when there are plenty of tatty donors around for a lot less money, so I would think your car is quite safe.

 

Easy to say, but in the end we all "have to sell" some of us sooner than others.

As for your remark on "tatty donors"; it doesn't sound as if 2709 falls into that category...

 

This is true, but there are reasons why the laws are what they are now. I don't find loopholes to be effective counterarguments to moral questions.

I would counter that this is confusing typesetters for authors. Copying a design is not the same as creating a design and the two shouldn't be confused. If you look at examples where Ferrari bodies were customized outside of the sanctioned coachbuilders, it becomes clear how much they are not authors because almost all of them are awful.

Restoring a piece of art that is deteriorated is fine (though still controversial to some when it is considered a master work). To change a piece of work (by someone as significant as Picasso) into something completely different would be appalling to most people, and certainly to anybody with any kind of appreciation for art. The disgust has nothing to do with what the new thing ended up looking like, or whether it was done for profit or personal enjoyment, it's because something that was special and irreplaceable was destroyed. If you asked random people on the street about Picasso, most of them probably wouldn't know much about the artist or his work, but all of them would still know that you don't f*** with an original.

I don't think anyone is claiming it is fraud, but destroying original irreplaceable objects from the highest echelon of any collectible category is wrong. Ferrari is to the car world what Picasso is to the art world. The only difference is that there are A LOT more original works from Picasso than there are pre-1970 Ferraris.

I don't have any ill will towards the replicas from the past -- what's done is done. But to destroy a good car now just doesn't make any sense. Why not just buy one of the many poor replicas that exist, which can be bought for a lot less money than an original car anyway, and then turn it into something more correct? Then the effort would be improving the breed rather than thinning it by eliminating another original car.

 

In response to the question in bold, yes, I do. Because so many of them end up displaying their cars without disclosing the truth that they are fakes. I believe the replica industry exists because of a vanity based demand. For the money a "better" replica costs, you can buy many great and beautiful cars. Original ones. But the majority of those who are buying the replicas do so because they want to look like they own something they can't afford.

I don't lose sleep over it, but this thread was open to discuss this very issue so I will continue to post in it as long as I think I have to. It's part of enjoying life...

 

This is just an open and adult debate on a public forum at the end of the day, we all enjoy the marque, and life would be boring if everyone had the same opinion

I can see how the replica industry can irk some people but, but it's never going to stop unless the donor cars become too valuable to make it viable, and I don't see that happening any time soon.

 

My answer to you is simply don't sell. It is likely that it will be used as a replica. Of course if you want/need the money then what will be will be ...

The fact that your car is perfect does not matter to these people ...
Pete

 

This is a fallacy that replica supporters keep falling back on.

The New Zealand company that I mentioned earlier recently used 3 good quality cars that others tried to buy off them to save, but they would not sell them. There is a thread showing the cars somewhere on this site.

In the end profits drive the industry, and they could not give a flying fnck about what they are destroying. They are most definitely not old car enthusiasts in my book.

If they could make money by cutting up a genuine 250GTO, they would get the grinders out now.
Pete

 

Here ? Post #1737...
http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/recreations-non-period-rebodies/220313-official-replica-re-creation-thread-87.html

 

Heh, the sucker pays up in the end, so the price of the donor does not really matter to these people.

 

Yes, here is a photo of the three: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/140115929-post6.html

But again I'm out of this discussion. Some people are old car enthusiasts, others are not and see this replication process as acceptable. It appears you cannot change their views, either way.
Pete

 

The discussion is important to make people understand that you cannot experience a 250 GTO by putting together a pile of random parts and crafting an mongrel body on top of it. That would be like wearing a fake Rolex to know how it feels to be rich.

If this discussion has saved one car from unnecessary destruction over the past 20 years, it has been worth it.

 

Yes, discussion and photos are important. Just some examples found on the Internet. Is this the future of the 2+2 cars ? And how many are left intact today ?
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I know at least some (and probably all) of the GTE Hot Rods are based upon taking the carcasses of conversions and putting them on an American chassis -- so these examples are only symptoms of the problem. The cause is the conversions.

You would think that the remaining bodies from conversions would be a treasure trove of parts and have considerable value on their own -- but this isn't really the case at all. They routinely sell for almost nothing (at least they did a couple years ago before the market run-up). The reason they sell for nothing is that there really isn't anything you can do with an empty body once the chassis, engine, gauges and other stuff have been stripped out.

The patron saint of body revival is Darren on Fchat. He bought a 330 GT S1 body in perfect condition for $4k and then, with a budget of practically zero dollars, fabricated a frame from scratch and restored parts that had rightfully been left for dead to better than new condition. What Darren accomplished made MacGyver look like a babbling moron. Even when a restoration is completed, however, the challenge remains to get a serial number for the restored car because the SN always travels with the conversion. There is no easy recovery once the damage has been done.

Darren's work can be seen in this thread: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/vintage-thru-365-gtc4-sponsored-vintage-driving-machines/387338-330gt-2-2-series-i-parts-wanted.html. He hasn't posted in a long time -- hope he is well because he is a one-off in the best possible way.

 

There are fortunately some of us left in the world that still believe in freedom. As long as the owner does not represent the car in question as a SWB in a sale, it is his car and he can do with it as he chooses. If the casual passerby mistakes it for something it is not, that is his problem and I cannot help him with it.

Loophole in the law my ass. One mans loophole is another mans freedom. It is not governments place to micromanage the universe. Good God they do too much of that already.

We have an LM002 and it is mistaken for a Hummer. Should I be required to paint a sign on it proclaiming otherwise? After all the Lamborghini badges are rather small.

People should get over themselves. Respect other peoples property rights and worry less about other peoples lives and activities. It is OK not to approve but quit dictating what others can and cannot do.

It is just a car, a very nice car but it is still just a car.

 

It is not about being acceptable or not. It is about respecting others views, rights and opinions.

It is no different than shoving your religion down the throat of another.

I am an old car enthusiast and have a great appreciation for the conservation and preservation of them. At the same time I have respect for the rights of those that are not.

If we all feel we have such a righteous cause here lets set up a foundation, donate all our money and buy them all up to protect them. After all museums and patrons of the arts do that all the time.
But what to buy up? Which will be saved and which do not deserve it? Who is so omnipotent to make those decisions?

And now since our foundation owns them, who gets to enjoy them? No one? Everyone?

If you are not willing to do that, just sit back and be quiet because you can't or won't put your money where your mouth is.
I say that collectively, not directed at you Pete.

 

And...

We keep wringng our hands about the cars that have been cut up or modified. 20 years ago or more even, how many were in barns covered in crap or with Chevy engines in them, or just an incomplete pile of parts? There were even a couple of GTO's in that category. The value and the interest has seen to it a great many have been saved and more still have been raised from the dead.

We should be rejoicing the fact that so many have been found, rolled out, put back to original configuration and are back out being run for all to enjoy.

 

Well said. Owners have been chopping, rebuilding and breaking undervalued cars since the dawn of automotive time and will continue to do so. I may think it moronic that someone destroys a rare or original or beautiful car to create something I dislike but its not for me to pronounce on why nor on their right to do so.

 

That car was in my family from 1970 until my father passed and it was sold out of his estate in 2007. It's a shame, but it'll be interesting to see what it gets turned into.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The end is nigh
Image Unavailable, Please Login