free hit
counters
Lotus vs Lotus legal actions starts Mon. 24.Jan - Motorsport & Trackdays - The Lotus Forums Jump to content


Lotus vs Lotus legal actions starts Mon. 24.Jan


Recommended Posts


Upgrade today to remove Google ads and support TLF.
  • Replies 576
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Forgive me if I've missed something here, there or everywhere else this is being debated but how can Group Lotus terminate a five-year licensing agreement when I thought it was David Hunt who 'owned' the Team Lotus brand and he sold it onto Tony F?

:getmecoat:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep up at the back!

Group Lotus own the right to use the word 'Lotus' in any automotive sense. Tony Fernandes had to have a licence to call his team Lotus Racing last year and Groups perception that he exceeded the scope of this licence lead to it's early termination.

Tony can own Team Lotus but without licence from Group Lotus he might as well own the rights to call his team Ferrari Racing, it's not legal to use without licence from the trademark owner.

Visit this website and read some of the articles on the matter.

88 Esprit NA, 89 Esprit Turbo SE, Evora, Evora S, Evora IPS, Evora S IPS, Evora S IPS SR, Evora 400, Elise S1, Elise S1 111s, Evora GT410 Sport

Evora NA

For forum issues, please contact the Moderators. I will aim to respond to emails/PM's Mon-Fri 9-6 GMT. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

lost the plot after 6 bottles of Old peculiar......................

who wouldn't :whistle:

Cliff

Men marry women with the hope they will never change. Women marry men with the hope they will change. Invariably they are both disappointed. : Albert Einstein

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pick it back up in the morning, you'll feel fine!

Just remember - Lotus Of Teams, Usually Squabbling...!

88 Esprit NA, 89 Esprit Turbo SE, Evora, Evora S, Evora IPS, Evora S IPS, Evora S IPS SR, Evora 400, Elise S1, Elise S1 111s, Evora GT410 Sport

Evora NA

For forum issues, please contact the Moderators. I will aim to respond to emails/PM's Mon-Fri 9-6 GMT. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep up at the back!

Group Lotus own the right to use the word 'Lotus' in any automotive sense. Tony Fernandes had to have a licence to call his team Lotus Racing last year and Groups perception that he exceeded the scope of this licence lead to it's early termination.

Tony can own Team Lotus but without licence from Group Lotus he might as well own the rights to call his team Ferrari Racing, it's not legal to use without licence from the trademark owner.

Visit this website and read some of the articles on the matter.

"Just remember - Lotus Of Teams, Usually Squabbling...!"

Good one, Bibs. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Regarding the use of the "trademark," isn't that precisely the issue being parsed here? How can you "own" the rights to the words "Team Lotus" (as Hunt did, and Fernandes does), and not have the right to use those words, irregardless of some other entity's ownership of a similar but different word combination? I suppose that's another way of asking how DH was able to use Team Lotus in the first place.

And yes, I'm being somewhat of a Devil's advocate here (possibly even pedantic? yet that's exactly what the high court must decide), as "Lotus" is in fact a recognised marque/brand any way you look at it, and some protections certainly exist in the law. This whole affair is one giant conundrum.:dizzy:

Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Group Lotus own the right to use the word 'Lotus' in any automotive sense. Tony Fernandes had to have a licence to call his team Lotus Racing last year and Groups perception that he exceeded the scope of this licence lead to it's early termination.

This is true, but the agreement when the company was sold was that Group Lotus were not to race open-wheeled cars, but Bahar doesn't think that matters and just wants to turn Lotus into Ferrari

Tony can own Team Lotus but without licence from Group Lotus he might as well own the rights to call his team Ferrari Racing, it's not legal to use without licence from the trademark owner.

As 'Team Lotus' and 'Lotus' were set up seperately, and traded as two seperate companies, neither owned the rights to the other name. So both names were trademarked/copyrighted to is respective company.

Group Lotus own most trademarks with the 'Lotus' name in it, but not all of them, like 'Team Lotus' and they also do not own the name of my local chinese 'Lotus House'.

This is just Group Lotus trying once again to get 'Team Lotus' without paying for it.

"Just remember - Lotus Of Teams, Usually Squabbling...!"

Regarding the use of the "trademark," isn't that precisely the issue being parsed here? How can you "own" the rights to the words "Team Lotus" (as Hunt did, and Fernandes does), and not have the right to use those words, irregardless of some other entity's ownership of a similar but different word combination? I suppose that's another way of asking how DH was able to use Team Lotus in the first place.

If you own the trademark and rights to a name, you can use it, because you are legally the owner, you can only use that name though!

What is the difference between an overtake and a crash? An overtake is a crash that never happened!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep and that's why Team Air Aisa can use the Team part with aplomb on their cars, but without the licence they can't use Lotus. So this year, Team should be the name of the green and yellow cars which Kovi and Trulli drive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read my post? Is your local chinese restaurant in the automotive industry?

There are Lotus watches, Lotus biscuits, Lotus loo roll, Lotus shoes, Lotus flowers and Lotus restaurants and they can all enjoy those lovely 5 letters in that order BUT if you have anything to do with cars, you need to pay Group Lotus for the rights to use those letters, it's the law.

I'll not explain it again without a baseball bat to reinforce the key points...

88 Esprit NA, 89 Esprit Turbo SE, Evora, Evora S, Evora IPS, Evora S IPS, Evora S IPS SR, Evora 400, Elise S1, Elise S1 111s, Evora GT410 Sport

Evora NA

For forum issues, please contact the Moderators. I will aim to respond to emails/PM's Mon-Fri 9-6 GMT. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to but don't want my legs broken!

:innocent:

Possibly save your life. Check out this website.
http://everyman-campaign.org/

 

Distributor for 'Every Male' grooming products. (Discounts for any TLF members hairier than I am!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is going to be interesting to see how this matter plays out in court.

I have no doubt Clive Chapman sold the rights to the Team Lotus brand and heritage to David Hunt in 1994 in good faith, but If as has been said by some that the Lotus name pertaining to ALL types of vehicle is the sole property of Group Lotus, then surely Clive Chapman fraudulently sold the name to David Hunt and both Hunt and Fernandes will be coming after him and his mother Hazel for compensation If the case is found in favour of Group Lotus.

I had a feeling that when Bahar took over he would be devoting muchof his time to persuing all who flagrantly used the Lotus name and logo, it would be ironic If the actions he has instigated ultimately lead to the downfall of Colin Chapmans son and Classic Team Lotus.

SUNP0003-1.jpg
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is going to be interesting to see how this matter plays out in court.

I have no doubt Clive Chapman sold the rights to the Team Lotus brand and heritage to David Hunt in 1994 in good faith, but If as has been said by some that the Lotus name pertaining to ALL types of vehicle is the sole property of Group Lotus, then surely Clive Chapman fraudulently sold the name to David Hunt and both Hunt and Fernandes will be coming after him and his mother Hazel for compensation If the case is found in favour of Group Lotus.

I had a feeling that when Bahar took over he would be devoting muchof his time to persuing all who flagrantly used the Lotus name and logo, it would be ironic If the actions he has instigated ultimately lead to the downfall of Colin Chapmans son and Classic Team Lotus.

Nothing would happen to Classic Team Lotus, they have a licence from Group Lotus to use the Lotus part of the name.

Team Lotus back in the day also had a licence from Lotus Group as it was called. Lotus Group didn't have a problem with Team Lotus back then as they did not participate in F1 themselves.

The main problem is Proton allowed TF to have a licence for 2010 to use the Lotus name, this was before Bahar arrived.

You have to blame Proton as they must of known Bahar wanted to go into F1 before they put him in charge. Mind you it could of been the Malaysian Government putting pressure on Proton to allow the licence, who knows!

Link to post
Share on other sites

this makes me sick. why can't they just get along and work together? at the end of this it should be about promoting and saving one of the last british legends. the car and the name !!! as an english man i am appalled that it has all come to the red little monster "CASH"

They are only interested in profit, that is what killed Lotus in the first place. work together for the love of the name not think the name will work for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the Chapman sale again . I would love to see the actual sale terms to see if they spell out requiring permission from Lotus cars to use the name. I'm sure Hunt and Fernandes think otherwise or they wouldn't have purchased the team. I guess we'll all see soon enough and know who was right all along.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that would be interesting. One thing to keep in mind is that the Chapman family never sold the team to Hunt, but to Peter Warr and Peter Colins. Hunt bought it from the receivers. I seem to recall reading somewhere (think it was in Autosport article about the sale in 1990) that the family also (at least in the beginning) kept a stake, but have never seen this confirmed anywhere else so could be wrong. What does seem apparent is that the family in the sale at least kept some assets, like Ketteringham Hall and I would imagine a lot of the old stuff that Clive has built Classic Team Lotus arround.

Now I know that Hunt in his purchase did indeed get two registered trademarks, but given that these were first registered in 1988, and Group Lotus has a trademark registration of the word Lotus used on vehicles dating back to 1957 and the ACBC logo dating back to 1962 I would not be surprised to see Clive or the group pulling out an old agreement with terms stating something to the effect of term regulating its use.

There is in fact mention of such an agreement in this document here, which is the details of a successful opposition by Group Lotus in 1988 to Hunt extending the trademark rights he already had:

http://www.ipo.gov.u...ults/o21098.pdf

Page 2, last three paragraphs and page 3, first three paragraphs, says the following:

“The opponents provide a Statutory Declaration from Jon Messent, the Company Secretary of Group Lotus Limited. Mr Messent provides the following historical details.

He says that the late Colin Chapman founded the company which eventually became Group Lotus Limited. Mr Chapman also founded a company called Team Lotus International Limited who ran a racing team called TEAM LOTUS, which involved the leasing of advertising space on a racing car to various sponsors.

In 1994 Team Lotus International 15 Limited, assigned its business to Team Lotus Limited but very soon thereafter went into liquidation. Mr Messent disputes whether Paintglossy Limited (Team Lotus Ventures Limited, that is the Applicants) is the true successor in title to the business of Team Lotus Limited. He supports this view by stating that his company had an agreement both with Team Lotus International Limited and its successor Team Lotus Limited. The intention of this agreement was that the public would not be misled into thinking that there remained an association between the two companies and, to this end, Team Lotus International Limited intended to use a much earlier device (if it used a device mark with the words Team Lotus) which would not cause such deception.

Another part of this agreement was that any successor in title should conclude an agreement with his company. This, Mr Messent states, has never been done. He is not aware of the chain of title whereby the Applicants claim to have acquired rights from Team Lotus Limited.

Furthermore, Mr Messent states, it was also agreed between Group Lotus Limited and Team Lotus Limited that they would cease all use of a device mark similar to marks for which the application has been made (the only difference being that the words Team Lotus are substituted by the word Lotus). He concludes that even if Paintglossy Limited contend that they are in some way related to Team Lotus Limited their application is in breach of this agreement.”

Now it would really be a twist in this tale if either Clive or the group pulls out such an agreement, basically nullifying the rights of Hunt/Fernandes. Could be one reason why Group Lotus has asked for a summary hearing, which in my mind is something one does if you are really confident in your case.

Then again, I could be missing this by a mile...

Roll on next Monday :detective:

Edited by gtornes78
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the "3 Lotus Peters" I know Warr has passed away, How about Collins or Wright? (It would be interesting on their take if either are still with us.) in any event I hope this is settled soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wright is still arround. Working for the FIA (last I heard). See here for instance: http://fia.com/en-GB/automotive/issue-15/institute/Pages/article-17.aspx

Not sure about Collins, not really seen any public mention of him im many years, but also never seen anything that would suggest he has passed away.

..the Chapman family never sold the team to Hunt, but to Peter Warr and Peter Colins.

Confusing even myself now. Meant Peter Wright and Peter Collins. Warr was replaced as team principal by Colins in 1989.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Truly interesting stuff, Geir. If Group Lotus succeeds in producing said "old agreement," and thus nullifies any valid claim to (or sale of) the "Team Lotus" verbiage (either by Hunt or Fernandes), then it would appear that Fernandes' only hope in court would be to challenge Group's abbrogation of his five year "licence," the cancellation of which was a result of his so called "abuse" of its privileges (according to Group, anyway).

If this happens, then the Fernandes team will have to be renamed, and time grows short for gaining the approval of all the other teams. Perhaps Bernie has authority to do this by decree? If the renaming request fails, Hekiki and Jarno are (temporarily at least) out of a job!

If all this leads to a grid "vacancy," will Fernandes have to start the process all over again?

Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My brain hurts...................

All we know is that when they stop making this, we will be properly, properly sad.Jeremy Clarkson on the Esprit.

Opinions are like armpits. Everyone has them, some just stink more than others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he can call the team whatever he wants, providing it's legal but the chassis will remain a Lotus. So, if Team :Lotus is ruled against we will have Lotus running a Renault and Team Fernandes, or whatever, running a Lotus. That should make things clear for all the fans. I suppose Tony has a better chance of getting all the teams to agree to a chassis name change than does Renault i.e. more than zero but how much more, I don't know.

S4 Elan, Elan +2S, Federal-spec, World Championship Edition S2 Esprit #42, S1 Elise, Excel SE

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I have understood it any team can chose to change a name, even of the chassis, whenever they want.

If this is done without unanimous approval of the other teams they will however lose the historic rights to TV money they have built up. They will effectively become a Coloumn 1 team again. For Fernandes this means that the rights from 10th place in constructors championship this year is lost. The Enstone squad would lose rights having been built up over many more years

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...