Nedley
If i gave you the blueprints to the car for your use, i would certainly expect my blueprints back, unless i specifically said at the time you could keep them. But, nothing prevents you from making quality copies for your own use as the information is now public and that publication was accepted by CS et al. To further the objectives of open source availability of data to aid in preventing deceptions, you might separately publish those docs.
IMHO, you are the only person who has taken that Cobra raw material and created an important product and service with the use of same. Your work and imagination were important and the critical value-added to not only create both the product and service, but particularly to "police" the various frauds that continue to be foisted on a moderately unsophisticated public. SAAC certainly retains ownership of the publishing of that data, IMO; but that might be contended. My only point was that contention is more likely when one picks a public fight and uses charged language gratuitously.
i realize that others have managed other car histories in the Registry.
Turk
You may certainly criticize my lack of insider knowledge. Or anything else you wish. But, at some point this story will get a reality check and we shall see what we shall see. i see the lawyer's letter as only an initial attempt at getting what Shel' thinks is his own property back. Is there a previously initial letter and are you privy to it?
If it is true that SAAC have not even responded to two letters, have purposely avoided publishing a more conciliatory initial lawyer's letter and have firstly responded with this amateurish press release, SAAC isn't the good guy and won't be found such by most folks. Seeking defense funds from the public and not making all those communications available might be quite a further error of judgement.
It is often quite inconvenient to have to hold elections, just to prove the poll results. Legal cases are frequently similar, right up to the day of court.
Perhaps i haven't learned much about this issue yet compared to the more cognizant and inside informed amongst us. You seem certain, so i accept that at the moment, as a given. Hopefully you will keep us all up to speed with your insider knowledge, to keep us from going too far astray. Your forecast of the outcome of this contest will be read with interest by this plebeian.
--------------------
Just because FORD and Shelby have current "issues" doesn't mean FORD will let their one-man
PR personality be "screwed-over", even by himself. Too much future at stake.
i watched the British side of the Angliss/Shelby affair from close near-daily proximity in Weybridge, as a valued frequent customer and friend and knew Shel' was blowing smoke from his asymptote. And so it came to pass. i similarly watched the Angliss/FORD argument and knew sufficient Brit law to be confident that Angliss would prevail in the UK. And so it came to pass.
i also forecasted that the British public and automotive trade-press would not support FORD's attack on Angliss. And so it came to pass. FORD came away looking very bad and they deserved it.
i caution SAAC again to get better
PR advice on this (not me, i am biased both ways) and act with wisdom, sans smart-assymetry. The public will not smile on anyone that sullies their heros for no good reason.
For example, observe Hollywood's current attempt to denigrate our troops (and thereby the President) with the soldier's rape of a 14 year-old Iraqi girl using mega-star power and cubic money. Quite differently than Henry Nostrilitis Waxman's salivating spittle-mouth, the public are staying away from Hollywood's anti-war BullPuckey in droves. People do not want to see truly ugly, insulting and unfair behavior as cover for political lies and political purposes.
Raising the argument to stratospheric and public heights is not an effective opening strategy or gambit with a genuine hot-head. He will see your bid and raise it just for the excitement. Remember, he is a race winner that bet his life on the outcome of those races, with no quarter given or opportunity missed. Even his lawyers likely do not understand who they have as a client.
It will be interesting, to be sure, but i wouldn't take on anyone that can publish their point of view by the 55-gallon barrels of ink and megawatts of TV interviews, without serious supporting contractual & legal documentation, which has been at least unrevealed to date.
It is less likely to re-establish the status quo ante bellum if the antagonist is convinced we are grossly unfair or/and congenital liars-by-omission, not worth re-establishment.