Italian judges rule that the 250 GTO is a work of art.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7179451/Italian-judges-rule-Ferrari-250-GTO-work-art.html

 

everyone can copy a picasso without any problems - if he is able to paint
the only thing is he may not sign it as a picasso but he may sign it as a copy - and that is not forbidden

also the judge is in italy and so only valid for italy. worldwide there are so many people/companies rebuilding cars - what about GTO in england making replicas from ferraris? all not legal then???

strange world today

 

This has already been partially ruled on when the Italian courts scrapped some replica Maserati's despite them containing some original parts.
https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/threads/maseratis-melted-down.245436/

 

And on line today:
https://ferraris-online.com/cars/1965-ferrari-330-gto-recreation-6689-gt/

 

yikes. That is not a good one.

 

Does this apply to the Series ONE GTO only or also include the Series TWO (1964) design?

Marcel Massini

 

good question

 

Interesting in that the name of the shop that was planning on building the replicas is not mentioned in the article.

 

I would say absolutely that it also includes the Series 2 1964 design. The 3 originals and 4 Scaglietti S2 '64 conversions ARE Ferrari 250 GTOs and, each example is no less a 250 GTO than the S1 design cars. They are always included as part of the history of the 250 GTO, as they indeed contributed to the long racing history of this car and the ruling has been made not only because of the design but because of that racing history.

Reference is made in a number of the articles that the 250 GTO holds the record price for a car achieved at auction, which actually belongs to a S2 bodied example, 3413GT. See here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/06/24/iconic-ferrari-recognised-work-art-bid-protect-worlds-valuable/

 

Yes, I received his email last night. I noticed that there was no mention of the shop that built the mechanicals or did the final assembly, unless The description has been updated.

 

I believe that the shop referenced is Ares as they were planning on selling rebodied Ferrari 812/575s. When you properly understand the legal framework of how Singer works you will see where Danny went wrong. I had an in depth discussion with Singer’s legal counsel and it’s very clever and deliberate what they are doing.

 

Some of the description is plain wrong.
Notably some of the names mentioned.

Marcel Massini

 

You mean Mike sometimes gets it wrong?

 

I'm going to agree with you.

 

Correct. Singer do not modify and then sell Porsche cars, they modify the existing owners cars to a specification requested by the owner. Clearly it is a loophole and Singer will even find the donor car for the owner to purchase before modification.

Not a lot Porsche could do about that, other than possibly block the sale of Porsche components directly purchased from them by Singer, but again there are easy enough work around's to that scenario.

Plus Porsche have a more open minded attitude to modified cars bearing their name. All good and free publicity.

In Italy Ferrari get whatever they want legally, not the case though outside of that country, where instead the men in sharp black suits use the companies financial muscle instead to scare anyone off.

 

Porsche is actually very litigious