Rolls-Royce considering trademark suit against Geely GE
Geely GE Limousine - Click above for a high-res image gallery
Earlier this week, we showed you the first live shots of Chinese automaker Geely's new GE model, a three-seat luxury sedan unveiled at the Shanghai Motor Show. With its gigantic, upright waterfall grille, boxy proportions, Spirit of Ecstasy hood ornament, and LED starlight headliner, it didn't take an enthusiast's eye to see that Geely is openly aping the Rolls-Royce Phantom.
Understandably, that development hasn't been sitting well with Rolls-Royce officials, who promptly got on the horn to their lawyers after clapping their eyes on the GE. While the British luxury firm has stopped short of saying they intend to sue, according to an article in the U.K. Telegraph, a Rolls-Royce spokesman admits "Rolls-Royce is currently keeping its options open and is in consultation with its legal advisers."
At an estimated £30,000 – around $44k USD – for the GE (versus £250,000/$365k for the Phantom), it could be argued that few are likely to confuse the two vehicles, but even still, critics argue that Roller would appear to have a compelling case that cars like the GE are not only intellectual property theft, but that they could also serve to erode brand equity of the genuine article.
What say you? Drop your fellow reader a line in 'Comments.'
Gallery: Geely GE Limo
Gallery: 2009 Rolls-Royce Phantom
Photos copyright © 2009 IceBin / Weblogs, Inc
[Source: U.K. Telegraph]
Get a WordPress.com Blog_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
paul 12:38PM (4/23/2009)
meh. there are so many chinese rip offs its not even funny anymore. What's the point of going after Geely when there's gonna be 2 more rip offs unveiled by the end of the year.
Reply
Quantumphysics 1:10PM (4/23/2009)
I'd like to think that the invisible hand would crush this piece of sht.
I'd like to think that no rich man with self respect would be caught dead in one of these - leading the company to end up going bankrupt.
But then I worry.
Is it possible enough of these could be sold to keep Geely alive?
I wish the end of each of these assembly lines had a car crusher.
reddy 1:15PM (4/23/2009)
and you still see some id!ots commending about the 'abilities' of chinese auto makers.. this speak volumes of their core principles and values or entrepreneurship
Jake B 1:49PM (4/23/2009)
I don't think it speaks volumes about anything other than RR feels their design got JACKED!
reddy 2:08PM (4/23/2009)
jalke b@ I was talking about the knockoffs by chinese automakers and what it implies
asng15 2:14PM (4/23/2009)
There is no way the RR will win this case, time will see, China is gona be the NO1 luxury automarket in the world, and is still growing with the high speed. Especially after the econmy crisis , a lot of company trying to find the Chinese partner to build cooperatie relationship in oder to catch the next biggest market. there is no way for those mammonist Auto makers to stir up a nest of hornets , otherwise spoil the ship for a halfpennyworth of tar.
Chrysler 300???
Jake B 2:47PM (4/23/2009)
The Chrysler 300 is hardly as blatant of a ripoff of an RR as this Chinese piece of junk. To say otherwise would be a lie. The 300 at least has some American chunkiness to it, as well as other cool styling pieces (SRT-8). Too bad the Chinese didn't all out copy the interior as well and had to put that goofy throne in there.
audi_arena 8:49PM (4/23/2009)
While you are probably correct that the rip-offs are endless, I still have a hard time letting it be ok. We need tougher laws and punishments accross the board for intelectual property. Why shouldn't ones ideas and imagination make them rich? How is a car designer any different from a movie producer or artist?
asng15 3:22PM (4/23/2009)
Jake B
2:47PM (4/23/2009)
"The 300 at least has some American chunkiness to it"
lol Who Retreats Fifty Paces Mocks One Who Retreats a Hundred.
just the pot calls the kettle black..........
Its all about the game, RR@BMW just trying to put on his act of doing this case in oder to protect their "value" (: , they arent loobylubbers. They dont want to Live-firing.
Geely just trying to get some attention from the people.they are doing solid job on their own designs and also needs to sell some cheapness stuff at the same time in oder to keep the business running.
Chinese is learning from America, During the 18** and 19**, the British scoff& blame the US copy&steal everthing from ....bla bla bla bla.............the US just keep silence untill the "grandness". Right now the same game.....lol
Maybe this is the necessary road lol
asng15 3:36PM (4/23/2009)
tekd
3:15PM (4/23/2009)
Yeah it might be unfair but unless someone counterfeits your car identically there's no real legal case.
Take netbook computers for example-all the manufacturers make them with similar proportions and with similar designs, but they can't sue each other because such a lawsuit is unwinnable.
Like this notebook that looks almost identical to the Macbook Air: http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2009/01/msis-super-thin.html
And Autoblog is basically making up this nonsense anyway, Rolls clearly isn't considering a lawsuit-all they're saying is that they're speaking to legal since they're legally REQUIRED to protect their own trademarks and copyrights, so if there was an actual case they would have to sue. They obviously said that they're not suing, because it'd just be a huge waste of legal fees to sue a company that doesn't even compete with them. And quite frankly it'd just be free publicity for Geely.
They'd be doing Geely a favor-Geely could say stuff like "our car was so good that Rolls Royce sued to stop us from making it" since Rolls suing them would actually give them credibility.
↓↑report
LOL, Come on you don;t say that straightforward . (:
We got an expert here.
Big Rocket 10:25PM (4/23/2009)
Everyone, let's do a little experiment. Print out that photo that Autoblog used at the beginning of this post, then use a Sharpie to black out the license plate that says Geely GE. Show it to your wife, co-workers, friends, etc, and ask them what they think of the car in the photo. If they think it is a Rolls Royce, then it is copyright infringement right there. We have just established a substantial or striking similarity between the typical Rolls Royce, and the Geely GE.
A lot of Geely apologists have argued there is no copyright infringement unless the copy is an exact copy. Maybe that's how things work in China, but certainly not in the US. Copyright infringement can occur when there is "substantial similarity" or "striking similarity" between the original and the unauthorized copy.
Finally, even if it is useless to sue Geely in Chinese courts, Rolls Royce can still sue in US and European courts to prevent Geely GEs from being exported out of China. If a layperson (non car enthusiast) sees a Geely GE in person and mistakes it for a RR, then perceives the poor workmanship to be a trait of RRs in general, that is brand equity damage (and potential sales loss) that can be prevented by an injunction on the Geely's export.
http://www.america.gov/st/econ-english/2008/April/20080429233718eaifas0.3043067.html
SUBSTANTIAL SIMILARITY [copyright]. The degree of resemblance between a copyrighted work and a second work that is sufficient to constitute copyright infringement by the second work. Exact word-for-word or line-for-line identity does not define the limits of copyright infringement. U.S. courts have chosen the flexible phrase "substantial similarity" to define that level of similarity that will, together with proof of validity and copying, constitute copyright infringement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement
A court will infer copying by a showing of a "striking similarity" between the copyrighted work and the alleged copy, along with a showing of both access and use of that access.
AltairDusk 3:06PM (4/24/2009)
I hope Rolls Royce sues them and wins. Are the Chinese companies even capable of coming up with a decent design on their own?
Oh, asng15, please do us all a favor; learn a few grammar rules and better English. Your posts are almost painful to read...
Nico 12:40PM (4/23/2009)
The cheap plastic handles inside probably have 'Made in China' all over them. My bet is they're made alongside little toy cars in a large plants for ultra-cheap plastics.
Reply
john 12:40PM (4/23/2009)
And i hope thay win ..
Reply
biggins 1:46PM (4/23/2009)
No kidding. I hope they drive those bastards into the ground.
Mark 12:42PM (4/23/2009)
This is a TRADEMARK issue, not a copyright issue.
A car isn't a book, a video, a piece of art, a sound recording or a sculpture.
Reply
13enS 1:02PM (4/23/2009)
"A car isn't ...a piece of art....a sculpture. "
Arguably it is. The aesthetics of cars follow the same design process as other arts do. Why else would Industrial Designers, who pen these cars, come from art schools?
hypermiler 12:44PM (4/23/2009)
When BMW sues Geely for RR copyrights, I advise them to choose the court wisely.
The last time BMW and Mercedes sued a Chinese copycat maker in Italy, they got screwed and actually ended up paying the copycat maker.
There is a big difference between an indistinguishable knock-offs and look-alikes...
Reply
petee209 1:45PM (4/23/2009)
It really is sickening to see BMW and Merc lose in court to these copycat automakers. They are basically saying it's ok to copy designs.
tekd 3:15PM (4/23/2009)
Yeah it might be unfair but unless someone counterfeits your car identically there's no real legal case.
Take netbook computers for example-all the manufacturers make them with similar proportions and with similar designs, but they can't sue each other because such a lawsuit is unwinnable.
Like this notebook that looks almost identical to the Macbook Air: http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2009/01/msis-super-thin.html
And Autoblog is basically making up this nonsense anyway, Rolls clearly isn't considering a lawsuit-all they're saying is that they're speaking to legal since they're legally REQUIRED to protect their own trademarks and copyrights, so if there was an actual case they would have to sue. They obviously said that they're not suing, because it'd just be a huge waste of legal fees to sue a company that doesn't even compete with them. And quite frankly it'd just be free publicity for Geely.
They'd be doing Geely a favor-Geely could say stuff like "our car was so good that Rolls Royce sued to stop us from making it" since Rolls suing them would actually give them credibility.