Suffolk Sports Cars

[XTR2Turbo]

https://www.eadt.co.uk/business/suffolk-sportscar-manufacturer-goes-into-liquidation-1-6821568?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social_Icon&utm_campaign=in_article_social_icons&fbclid=IwAR2yjzuBfYBAB2gC1OVuxSnFRjdG-rh4fPnLPBTAqJaE8QsKpmqjB8E-0GM

 

A shame. They seemed to offer some good looking replicas.  Gone into liquidation.  Numbers look a little odd though

[stephenh]

That is aweful. They produced superb kits of C types, and the SS100 replicas. In fact, a friend of mine has had an SS100 replica which he built some years ago.

[Blatman]

It's an enormous blow for the employees who are innocent in all this and of course one sympathises with their plight having been on the receiving end myself in the past.

But ever the polemicist... they were breaching Jaguars copyright, according to Jaguar. Surely all they had to do was stop.

The numbers look like the numbers of an unsustainable business. To me it looks like without the support of a generous benefactor the business would have gone down the tubes long before now.

[stephenh]

In theory, I agree, but they have been making replicas of the SS100 and the C type for several decades, so why do Jaguar get snotty about it now? It isn't as if Jaguar are in competition with Suffolk, unlike for example Westfield and Caterham back in the days of the pre-lit. 

Doesn't look too good for a certain manufacturer of a replica of the XKSS which was only launched recently at great expense I suspect. It will be a shame if that is stopped in its tracks. And what about the various manufacturers of replica Cobras, not least the really up market versions which are more faithful to the original arguably?

[Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman]

True, but some manufactures, Mercedes and Ferrari for example have gone after (good) replica manufacturers with extreme ruthlessness for decades.

 

Jaguar on the other hand, has recently, in the last few years, joined the ranks of makers suddenly “discovering” unused chassis numbers and closing out production runs of some of the very cars the replica makers have reproduced. So I guess are being more aware of, and protective of, their back catalogues.

[Kit Car Electronics]

Also, JLR have just lost their case against Ineos for the Grenadier, which appears to be blatantly Defender- inspired, so I have sympathies for them wanting to protect their designs.

[Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman]

1 hour ago, Kit Car Electronics said:

Also, JLR have just lost their case against Ineos for the Grenadier, which appears to be blatantly Defender- inspired, so I have sympathies for them wanting to protect their designs.

Oh, they’ve lost that, have they? I do quite like it, but not sure if I could live with all the Defender related comments you’d get!!

[stephenh]

It seems that although Roger Williams has retired from the business and production of the kits is ceasing, some of the Suffolk team are continuing in business and will provide service and support for owners of existing Suffolk cars, as well as maintaining classic Jaguar cars. So for existing owners it doesn't look quite so bleak.

[jeff oakley]

I read this earlier and as usual a big company has used their legal might to see off a company who is no threat at all. What will be interesting now is how far they go with this. It appears the company felt they had not got the resource to take on JLR even though they felt they would win it is too big a risk for anyone

 

There are many who make replica Jags of varying accuracy and in the case of Mercedes Benz they went after built cars as well when there was some Gullwing replicas being made.

 

Ferrari recently lost the court case they brought against a company making a 250GTO replicas. The court ruled that even though they had a copyright because they had not used it for so long they had lost the right to ownership of it. Perhaps as Dave said as JLR have now found a lucrative income stream with "continuation" models that cannot be used on the road perhaps they feel the need to finish off the best replica company in one fell swoop. It does not bode well for the AKSS as that is a perfect replica.

 

Looking at the finances they do look strange but one of the directors seems to have lost £570k as a result so not chicken feed for anyone.

 

Sad day for the employers and employees. 

[stephenh]

I suspect that the threatened breach of copyright claim isn't the whole story. In fact, the latest issue of the Jaguar Drivers' Club magazine mentions the liquidation, but doesn't mention any claim of breach of copyright. It was that article which confirmed that the Suffolk employees were intending to carry on servicing the existing owners, and providing service etc. for other classic Jaguars.

[Blatman]

On 05/09/2020 at 10:27, stephenh said:

In theory, I agree, but they have been making replicas of the SS100 and the C type for several decades, so why do Jaguar get snotty about it now?

 

What does length of time have to do with it? Jaguar seem to have made a legitimate business decision to protect it's brand and copyright. Caterham did the same same and as far as I am aware at no point are Westfield allowed to say "well the case was more than 30 years ago. Lets make 'replicas' again"... 

 

On 05/09/2020 at 18:41, jeff oakley said:

as usual a big company has used their legal might to see off a company who is no threat at all.

 

Size has nothing to do with it either.

 

The risk was making "replicas" in the first place. Did they ask Jaguar if they could make them? Probably not or they'd be waving the permission documentation in the direction of the JLR lawyers. I suspect that if they asked (which they should have), permission would have been denied. So they sought forgiveness not permission and forgiveness wasn't forthcoming.

OR (throwing a bone here) maybe they sought legal advice about making replicas of "classic" vehicles and the possible implication and as it turns out the advice was poor...

[stephenh]

40 minutes ago, Blatman said:

 

 

OR (throwing a bone here) maybe they sought legal advice about making replicas of "classic" vehicles and the possible implication and as it turns out the advice was poor...

OR maybe they took legal advice, didn't like the advice they received, and decided to ignore it??😄😄

[Steve (sdh2903)]

They should setup in China. They don’t seem to have an issue with ‘copyright’

[Blatman]

13 minutes ago, stephenh said:

OR maybe they took legal advice, didn't like the advice they received, and decided to ignore it??😄😄

 

Fair point 😄 

[jeff oakley]

I am no legal expert but I guess it will depend upon whether they copyrighted the designs in the first place and if it is fair.

 

For example a manufacturer builds a car, after so long others can make pattern parts to repair them as they do not have the right to stop that. This is set in EU law to stop manufacturers controlling everything from start to finish, this is block exemption rules.

 

With replica cars it appears different depending upon who the owner of the company is . Lamborghini were happy with their cars being replicated when it was not owned by VAG. Same with Ferrari, they actually approved some "Tool room copies"  but recently became heavy handed and then started legal action on some, which they have recently lost that case.

 

Suffolk are one of a number who have produced replicas in fact according to the internet, Suffolk have now made more replicas than were originally made. We do not know if Jaguars pending court case was to do with which model but it was reported in the local newspaper as having a significant part in their decision to liquidate.

 

This is different to the Westfield debacle as Caterham still produced the cars which Westfield were building which was too close to theirs.