Ferrari faces legal challenge from old ally

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Current page

109

Current page

110

Current page

111

Current page

112

Current page

113

Current page

114

Current page

115

Current page

116

Current page

117

Current page

118

Current page

119

Current page

120

Current page

121

Current page

122

Current page

123

Current page

124

Current page

125

Current page

126

Current page

127

Current page

128

Current page

129

Current page

130

Current page

131

Current page

132

Current page

133

Current page

134

Current page

135

Current page

136

Current page

137

Current page

138

Current page

139

Current page

140

Current page

141

Current page

142

Current page

143

Current page

144

Current page

145

Current page

146

Current page

147

Current page

148

Current page

149

Current page

150

Current page

151

Current page

152

Current page

153

Current page

154

Current page

155

Current page

156

Current page

157

Current page

158

Current page

159

Current page

160

Current page

161

Current page

162

Current page

163

Current page

164

Current page

165

Current page

166

Current page

167

Current page

168

Current page

169

Current page

170

Current page

171

Current page

172

It appears that the spaghetti is poised to hit the fan. Luigi J Chinetti the racing driver formerly known as ‘Coco’ Chinetti and son of the four-time Le Mans-winning founder of the North American Racing Team, who was a prime mover behind Ferrari’s early commercial success has filed a legal suit against the Italian company. He seeks “declaratory judgment and cancellation of the Trademark Reg Nos 3,223,963 (Ferrari Classiche) and 3,084,412 (Prancing Horse) based upon trademark misuse”.

Since all racing cars are an assembly of consumable parts they often have to be rebuilt. Sometimes modification became vital just to remain competitive. Often NART rebuilt crashed Ferraris with extensive recourse to new parts. Team members were proficient and their work was generally done with Ferrari’s full knowledge, and Chineffi raced the modified cars as ‘Ferraris’, again with the factory’s full knowledge. In fact, a car with Chinetti-designed frame and body not only raced as a Ferrari with the factory’s consent, but scored a top-10 finish at Le Mans. The Miami Division suit relates, however, that Luigi J Chinetti was restoring two Ferrari 275Ps chassis ‘0812’ and ‘0814’ in Italy when the factory claimed they were replicas and began litigation related to them.

The Italian authorities duly seized the cars and criminal counterfeiting charges were brought against Luigi J Chinetti. He then succeeded in convincing the court that the 275Ps were original Ferraris. He was acquitted of all charges and, after more than a year the P-cars were returned to his control for completion. The vast majority of Ferrari lovers are well aware that NART built a number of convertible Daytonas, known as the NART Spiders. Earlier this year, when Goodings auctioneers offered a Daytona Berlinetta that had been modified as a convertible, Ferrari’s New York attorneys protested that the vehicle: “…is being offered in violation of Ferrari’s trademark rights”. They contended that Ferrari’s trademarks were now being applied to a product so radically different from their original that “…as a trademark owner, Ferrari has never controlled or approved of the modifications to its car” and that “these modifications negatively impact on the safety specifications as well as the handling, and in general on its overall quality and image”.

That was knocked back, but the factory that for so many decades expressed zero interest in its old cars has apparently had a change of heart about the market, or in the revenue stream its restoration/ preparation industry now represents. Chineffi’s suit maintains that Ferrari is trying to utilise protection of its trademark to monopolise and manipulate the affermarket In so doing, Ferrari is creating disparate classes of car owners, by stopping the sale of some modified cars while not stopping others. The factory’s Ferrari Classiche division is claimed by the company to protect the integrity of the marques cars and to encourage their preservation.

In contrast, the suit contends that it is not Ferrari’s job to do this once the vehicles are placed “into the stream of commerce”. The suit claims Classiche’s operation negatively affects owners of non-certified/affested cars: “In refusing to certify cars without first receiving payment for inspection and repairs, Ferrari is misusing its trademark to monopolise the affermarket repair and restoration of Ferraris”. Chinetti additionally alleges that Ferrari “…has used and misused its trademarks for anti-competitive purposes and restraint of trade, trying to control the affermarket of its vehicles and generate its business in restoring and improving affermarket Ferraris”. Historically, America takes a dim view of anticompetitive practice. Should Ferrari’s modern, bluntly profit-driven approach to the old car world be explored under the forensic arc light of trial by jury, things could get very interesting…

Doug Nye

You may also like

Related products