EU copyright ruling on C type shape

Law Journal artical that could affect more replicas…

One should think that the copyright expires after 70 years, so… soon?
Unless there is something they can do to prolong that.

Im no lawyer but there is a appeal…so watch this space…its not over yet

Does this mean that Jelly Belly can sue all modern car manufacturers for violating their copyright on the shape of a Jelly Bean?

Sadly after a couple of calls, The damage to JAGAUR will be felt for a long time, or however much time they have left.
Here’s whats going on, Jaguar singled out the LOWEST FRUIT , person or persons with the least amount of means to go after because they know they couldnt in return .
Problem is they are OUR AGE TRUE ENTHUSIASTS, The ones that still buy new Jaguars even though a Toyota has better quality and materials.
This was another THINK TANK blunder.
Young people are not buying Jaguars.
Jaguar heritage was thinking , retain the rights or copyright then REMAKE or Continue making more C TYPES for 800 to a million plus to rich old people.
The problem is once that batch is made , you cant do it over and over, it ruins the value of the first batch., plus that group has a limited life span :slight_smile:
The 9600 hp anniversary cars died on the vine as the heritage itself isnt far behind.
Its a sad state of the company , if this keeps going, it will effect, PARTS REPRODUCTION and THEIR VENDORS, Jaguar Websites and liabilty of slander to the name…This is whats coming.
GM tried this years ago and sued EVERYONE , EVERYWHERE about anything .
Of course they went bankrupt and left a BAD taste forever to the loyal GM owners and vendors to this day.
Hopefully, Jaguar finds a new owner soon, something to change the tide.Hopefully.


Link to the appeal:

Joey, what a load of fear-mongering tosh! I started responding to this somewhere else after I donated to the cause. I Iost count of who was saying what and where, so I cut and pasted a cautionary note based on what was NOT included in the daughter’s press release as well as what was. This morning JLR provided a totally logical rebuttal.

I don’t agree with everything either side has said or done, but your caricature is so flawed it’s worth trying to turn off the faucet (which I’m sure it won’t).

My queries:

“As with many stories, this is a mix of ‘human interest’ and technical angles. On a human level we feel bad for the Magnussons and I have donated on that basis. I suggest anyone with past, current or potential future interest in the classic replica scene do the same, since whichever way this case is settled we are likely to learn relevant lessons. I wouldn’t feel comfortable gaining something worthwhile at someone else’s expense.

Mention of Karl’s age (68) or family are irrelevant and even his lifelong enthusiasm for the marque is presumably of no consequence in a trial of IP issues. These personal details are included purely to keep us reading and thinking “There but for the grace of God go I.” They are just a hook. Likewise, mentions of the family collection and the C being built in a ‘private garage’ are more emotive than substantive (I know of many ‘private’ facilities that surpass small commercial premises and the Magnusson’s workshop is most likely better than those of many readers here. The press release is written by the daughter, which is perfectly fine but needs to be borne in mind.

So much for the fluff. On the other hand, we now know (though it isn’t mentioned in the press release) that there was an initial intention to build at least two cars for sale [Edit: actually six cars] and some kind of company was set up to facilitate that. This is not the action of a pure novice amateur seeking to screw a dream-car lookalike together and act out his Tony Rolt fantasy or channel his inner Duncan Hamilton. It does explain why he met with Jaguar (and they with him) which is also something the average Joe would never do for a personal one-off or a kit car build.

The fact that the Magnusson’s ‘company’ has been dormant for some time as Elizabeth now informs us, does not mean it or its directors cease to exist or have legal interests or responsibilities. And where commerce is concerned, it would be typical, wise, and usually inexpensive to establish it as a limited liability enterprise, precisely to avoid ever risking major personal loss. Failure to protect one’s assets is hardly the fault of one’s competitors or adversary.

There are clearly some significant issues of potential personal and/or corporate hypocrisy or double-standards here, in view of JLR’s personal and corporate relations with, and benefits from, an active replica scene. There are also issues of legal versus PR and commercial priorities which senior managers will have grappled with, and nobody likes to see a butterfly broken on a wheel. But without any of us being mind-readers, the absence of full information (or probably ANY information) about JLR’s true thoughts and motivations, means that many of the opinions expressed - including this one - may turn out to be ill-informed. “

After I’d written the above, I got JLR’s version which has a whole ‘nuther bunch of facts and none of the emotional low-hanging fruit junk. Neville Swales had his share of IP hassles but dealt with them maturely, not like this.

JLR’s Open Letter:

Good Evening,

We understand that a recent news release issued by the defendants in a recent Swedish court ruling in Jaguar Land Rover’s favour in defending our copyright of the C-type body shape has proven unsettling and concerning for our community of Jaguar enthusiasts.

We wanted to reassure our customers and loyal enthusiasts like yourself that most of this news release was misleading, conjecture or false. We especially want to reassure owners of existing replicas. At Jaguar Land Rover we wholeheartedly value our communities’ continued support.

Attached is an open letter from the Director of Jaguar Land Rover Classic, Dan Pink, on behalf of Jaguar Land Rover with our reassurances.

Thank you for your time, and your enthusiasm for our vehicles and brand.

Best regards,


Alistair Sommerville

PR Manager

Jaguar Land Rover Classic


Pete I agree with you for the most part
All you have to do is look back at what GM did back in the late 90s…
They pulled up to The GM nationals with two huge 18 wheelers
1 had a 57 Chevy on the side
The they had a 1963 Corvetter
You walked through the trailers and were able to order GM official Liscense repro parts of course 3 times the price of the current after market repro parts.
Behind the two trucks were two Mercedes Benz station wagons with lawyers.
They walked the huge show field and started handing out gag orders and 5 people arrested for copy right infringements
One of them a 28 year old dad who was making baby bibs with his baby there with a shark and a kind corvette cartoon car on the bib!
After a 5,000 fine and a police escort off the field many were not happy
It was a joke and they picked on the weakest link!
I get it if you build a replica and SAY it’s a real car, that’s common sense but you know why this is happening, they are dying and grabbing at straws.
I love them more than most I have new jags every two years for 30 years
How did the 60th anniversary card turn out?
Selling 64 cars as clones for 800,000 a pair?
No flat floor no aluminum
Let’s think of this too
Can they really hold water like Dave suggests with a jelly bean, They went from Jaguar to British Leyland to Jaguar to Ford to Grandpa Tata to the new owners
Can they really do this?
Again if they claim it’s a real car all bets are off
But this this stuff, GM did the same and lost big.
Just my two cents
P.S If jag made new cars that people wanted we wouldn’t be having this discussion
They have no product line and I’m still buying it!
For the love of Jaguar and my Jaguar family

Joey I don’t know anything about GM or Mercs full of lawyers and I care even less. We could discuss the role of lawyers and litigation in US society versus Jaguar’s UK base but so what? Would you be OK with me referring to John Gotti or Danny DeVito when discussing you? It would be pointless because you’re more handsome than either and richer than both.

You often refer, quite rightly, to the fact that old Jag fans like us are dying off but at the same time you seem convinced that modern design sucks. I suspect that making cars we’d like would be exactly the wrong thing to do…

I love you too, Im retired I dont hang around Italians much any more :slight_smile:
I guess I get frustrated like most of us , why they make these choices.
Lets take Proteus or Realm, These people kept Jaguar history alive, Maybe I just get frustrated .
I just want Jaguar to be great again.
Maybe you and I BUY IT !

I can’t find the attached letter from Dan Pink. Do you have a link?

Despite having read everything available about this, Peter’s statement "But without any of us being mind-readers, the absence of full information (or probably ANY information) about JLR’s true thoughts and motivations, means that many of the opinions expressed - including this one - may turn out to be ill-informed. “ pretty much sums it up.

It is absolutely not obvious why JLR took on the Magnussons. The production of multiple vehicles may have been the reason. Taking that and the extent to which the specs were supported by exquisite CAD documents given to JLR may have been the ultimate concern. But there are other “toolroom” replica’s out there so why? Just Why?
The Court ruling sure seems harsh but a personal friend who took on a multinational suffered similarly when the Judge was certainly not an expert in the law being argued. Actions may be morally wrong but not necessarily in the eyes of the law.


Here’s the text of Dan Pink’s letter if anyone is interested.

To the Jaguar community,

You may have seen a recent news story relating to a C-type replica which portrays Jaguar Cars negatively, after a Swedish court ruled in our favour confirming that the C-type is protected by copyright. We wanted to reassure our customers and loyal enthusiasts that most of this news release was misleading, conjecture or completely untrue. At Jaguar Land Rover wewholeheartedly value our communities’ continued support. Importantly, we want to allay any fearsamongst the network of enthusiasts that Jaguar Land Rover might pursue individual owners of replica Jaguars and insist upon their destruction. This is not true. We will however, take action to stop businesses using our Intellectual Property illegally for their own profit, as in this case.

The Swedish court’s decision in our favour confirms that we were correct to take this caseforward. According to the Swedish court, the external shape of the Jaguar C-type is protected bycopyright, and this was infringed by a car being built by the defendants’ company, the first of six that they planned to build and sell at over Euros 250 thousand each.

At Jaguar Land Rover we understand that original C-types and official continuations are attainable for only a few and would like to be enjoyed by more enthusiasts. We have never, nor would we, take action against private owners of pre-existing individual replica vehicles, nor insist upon the destruction of their cars. In this case Jaguar Land Rover offered the defendants an opportunity to retain their completed replica for private use and enjoyment, however this was declined, and the defendants chose to continue with their plans to make money from our copyright.

The enthusiasm of our fans and the celebration of our heritage is extremely important to JaguarLand Rover. We will do everything we can to safeguard our heritage and it’s to honour thiscommitment that Jaguar Land Rover Classic was established in 2017. Dedicated to the production, restoration and maintenance of historic models, as well as the manufacture of new parts, Jaguar Land Rover Classic ensures that enthusiasts can enjoy our vehicles long into the future.

Jaguar Land Rover Classic preserve cars of historic significance and collections, we train talented technicians in specialist methods to build and maintain these special vehicles, ensuring traditional skills do not disappear, and work with owner groups around the world. When restrictions are lifted Jaguar Land Rover Classic will once again open the doors of its world class facilities for enthusiasts to enjoy. We thank you for your ongoing support.

Yours sincerely

Dan Pink Director, Jaguar Land Rover Classic on behalf of Jaguar Land Rover

1 Like

The letter leaves a lot to be desired.
I hope all sides come together but again I feel
A think tank did an overreach here and now it’s back track time.
The interior of the NEW I pace was really special
Focus on a hybrid version with that lovely interior and let’s get the ball rolling again!


Thank you for posting the letter.

Joey - agree wholeheartedly. JLR Classic may actually be doing the larger JLR a disservice by their actions.

The key point is “We will however, take action to stop businesses using our Intellectual Property illegally for their own profit, as in this case.”
In a similar case Ferrari trademarked the 250 GTO in 2008 but because they didn’t build any in a five year period the trademark was protection was lost. But then they file for the design to be a work or art, so effectively copyrighting the design.
So it would seem that the latter will still be in place and allows Ferrari also to use copyright protection to stop the commercial creation of replica’s. Ferrari LOSES legal battle to trademark the shape of 250 GTO | This is Money

At the end of the day, even at EU 250k vs I am assuming GBP 1 mill or so for a C-Type continuation I don’t see the value in JLR’s approach.
Will it destroy the availability of “new” supply of turn key replica’s? What about the kit versions? Unless of course the businesses are unprofitable?
On the plus side stopping the availability of “new” replica’s may be a plus for current replica owners. Keep working on it Pete!!


So, reading between the lines, does this mean Lynx, Proteus, etc. Can’t build any more replicas of Ds, Cs and XK-SSs, or do they have some kind of licensing agreement in place that this other company didn’t have? Or am I missing something?

Hi Tom…Well it is all very unclear at the moment…yes JLR have one a case in Sweden…but there is an appeal so its not over yet…will that have a effect anywhere else in the world UK/US? It may make some think if they are making replicas…Ecossie Ecurie have recently announced production of "Continuation C,s here in the UK…no info yet if they have a licence agreement with JLR…but they are not exact tool room copies…we eill have to wait to see how this pans out…Steve

1 Like

Reply from the Magnessuns to JLR,s open letter

Links referenced in the document:

As I suspected this is exactly like GM in the 90s
Jaguar is going after the lowest fruit
This can really go bad for vendors and old replica cars as well
Unless these people claim the car is a real c type , let it go… Unless you abuse something