http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Hood_Engineering


http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=225134&i=80

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/1998/44.html

why? reading all that ranting and I may lose the will to live

Because I have a life to live

Can anyone translate the Birkin case judgement for me - into about 2 or 3 sentences?

Like Caterham won or Birkin won with some conditions?

Cheers

Mark

i'll pass thanks

I hope that you're not trying to stir up a heated debate, Mr Mango!

In the Birkin case, they won the appeal and are allowed to use the shape and the number 7 when producing cars. As far as I can see, this only applies to cars sold in South Africa though. It does seem that Caterham were not licenced by Lotus to produce the series 3 even though they genuinely thought they were!
The initial agreement between Caterham and Lotus had been misinterpreted
Anything before 1988 was not argued by Caterham, hence the pre litigation Westfields etc. I think we need to see the notes from any UK case to make a decision on copyright / passing off etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marcus
In the Birkin case, they won the appeal and are allowed to use the shape and the number 7 when producing cars. As far as I can see, this only applies to cars sold in South Africa though. It does seem that Caterham were not licenced by Lotus to produce the series 3 even though they genuinely thought they were!
The initial agreement between Caterham and Lotus had been misinterpreted
Anything before 1988 was not argued by Caterham, hence the pre litigation Westfields etc. I think we need to see the notes from any UK case to make a decision on copyright / passing off etc.

---