Why does every thread here devolve into a "Real" vs. "Replica" argument?

[Joe's Garage]

The problem with that analogy is Da Vinci died and his great grandson coped his granfather's work using better materials and a modernized design. These creations are called Da Vinci copies from the grandson, not real or genuine Da Vinci's.

Kapesh?

[REAL 1]

Originally Posted by Joe's Garage

The problem with that analogy is Da Vinci died and his great grandson coped his granfather's work using better materials and a modernized design. These creations are called Da Vinci copies from the grandson, not real or genuine Da Vinci's.

Kapesh?

Your response to use a phrase is "hackneyed and trite". Da Vinci didn't have a company producing his items. If he did my analogy would still be applicable. Then I guess since Enzo is dead new Ferraris are not genuine Ferraris nor would a continuation of the original Testarosa be a genuine Ferrari Testarosa if Ferrari chose to build them again.

It's all in the World registry. Quite simple really.

[Joe's Garage]

Originally Posted by Joe's Garage

The Facts: All 50 states require special provisions for DMV registration. All 50 states classify them as specialty constructed vehicles/component cars/kit cars/replicas.

The Law: Trade Dress ruling per Judge Walsh, the Shelby continuations hold no distinction over the other replicas. Mr. Shelby identified the replicas of the Cobra 427 S/C with the designation CSX 4000.

The Registry: Continuations are very cobra like and true replicas.

The Facts, The Law, The Registry.

Bada Bing, Bada Boom, Done!

Move along folks, there's nothing to see here anymore.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Joe's Garage

The problem with that analogy is Da Vinci died and his great grandson coped his granfather's work using better materials and a modernized design. These creations are called Da Vinci copies from the grandson, not real or genuine Da Vinci's.

Kapesh?

And to keep this tortured analogy going further, the curators at the Lourve and/or Metropolitan in NY (Ned and other board members) say it's a copy, a REPLICA. And not genuine. In fact, the owner of the "Mona Lisa" copy, Evan, admits it's a replica.

Ferrari doesn't make copies of their 1960's cars and they don't sell kits. Ferrari's have evolved, like the Porsche 911 and Corvette and become entirely LEGAL & REGISTER-ABLE cars. The modern Shelby Cobra replica cannot. Oh well.

As for the Registry, a) it's going to change and b) they ALSO use words like Cobra-like and true replica.

[Joe's Garage]

Registering CSX4206 was pretty simple in New Jersey -

Originally Posted by Joe's Garage

You call the NJ special titles division
You ask them to send you the "kit car package"
You follow the instructions
You trailer your car down to a specialty inspection station
You pass, you get registered ...

BAM, thank God for NJ's Kit Car DMV provisions eh!

[REAL 1]

Originally Posted by Joe's Garage

Move along folks, there's nothing to see here anymore.

Correcto!

Read the World Registry. It's all in there.

You know their desperate when they start referencing NJ DMV. Omg!!! I literally burst out laughing on that one.

[twobjshelbys]

Originally Posted by Al G

It also references them as genuine. Why do you always leave that part out?

Because it would neuter his agenda.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

Correcto!

Read the World Registry. It's all in there.

And it's all right here, from The Curator of Genuine Shelby Cobras, for everyone too.....

Originally Posted by Nedsel

Regrettably, it is the Shelby organization that committed the fraud, not the buyers of their product. One has to wonder about marketing tactics that beg the law to look the other way so cars could be sold as something they clearly were not. And this is not a case of not being able to say nice things about my old friend Carroll - it's simply stating the facts.

Originally Posted by Nedsel

Evan, ...That your car is a copy is not being debated, but a copy of what? The recreation that preceded it.

Originally Posted by Nedsel

The facts remain as follows: The cars that created the Cobra mystique - the 998 Cobras referred to as genuine, original, and legitimate - were built in the 1960's by the mutual partnership of AC Cars and Shelby American. Everything that followed was a copy in one form or another. Go down the list and name your brand, from Arntz to Butler to Contemporary, etc - they are all facsimiles of the original, and were marketed as such. Some are pretty good copies while some are less so. Regardless, if your Cobra-like automobile wasn't built in the 60's, it is not one of the 998 original cars, hence it must be something else. Such as a replica of one of the original Cobras. It simply can not be anything else, no matter how many different ways you attempt to spin it.

Originally Posted by Nedsel

Tony, the simple fact is that one of the points in the legal battle brought by Shelby against SAAC was his desire to take over the Registry. SAAC fought hard to prevent that from happening. Today, it is SAAC's position that they prefer to be an organization dedicated to the historic Shelbys of the 60's and early 70's, while ceding to the modern Shelby organization control of anything having to do with the later production cars.

Originally Posted by Nedsel

That's pretty much what everyone has acknowledged. The 60's Cobras are the original, authentic Cobras that define the term "real" in most peoples' minds when they ask the question, "Is that a real Cobra?" They are not asking how exact a copy of the 60's cars your car might be; they are asking, "Was it made in the 60's? Hence, is it a real Cobra?"

The next edition of the Registry will in all likelihood look much different than the 2008 version. Thank goodness.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by twobjshelbys

Because it would neuter his agenda.

Speaking of agendas, cough, cough, the word "genuine" as it relates to the CSX4000 replicas is not used. Please see Ned's comments above.

My agenda? The ONLY original, real, genuine, authentic Shelby Cobras were made in 1962-1967. That's my agenda.

[RodKnock]

Speaking of neutering, or as Ned called it, "certain liberties" were taken in the last Registry, with respect to the Shelby Cobra replicas. So, now, let's just call "a spade a spade."

Originally Posted by Nedsel

One aspect of what was published in the 2008 SAAC registry that many people fail to consider is that SAAC was smack in the middle of a legal battle with Carroll Shelby when the registry was being written. Given the delicacy of the proceedings, great care was taken not to antagonize Shelby or his attorneys, and certain liberties were taken with respect to what might otherwise have been seen as calling a spade a spade. At the time, it was PC to call it a shovel instead. Otherwise, one might have pointed out that out was AC Cars, Ltd. that created the AEX, BEX, COX, COB, and CSX chassis numbers (among others), which were simply a series of alterations in specification to the original AC Ace designated by A, B, and C to highlight the changes. The original Cobras were the result of a joint effort by both AC Cars and Shelby American, but neither would have produced the same car absent the willingness of the other to cooperate in their production. Hence, the later "Cobras" built exclusively by Shelby used VINs to which Shelby had dubious legitimate claim and were never approved by AC Cars nor its successor entity, AK. Read up on the legal battle between Shelby and Brian Angliss of AK, and note that Angliss built a number of cars using a CSX 3xxx VIN, using the theory, "if Shelby can appropriate what was AC's, AC can do the same to what was Shelby's."

The bottom line is that the newer Cobras, whether built by Shelby in the U.S. or AK in the U.K., lack the cooperative Anglo-American production model used in the construction of the 60's versions, and are therefore fundamentally different even if their specifications are similar.

[fordracing65]

Ferrari doesn't make copies of their 1960's cars and they don't sell kits. Ferrari's have evolved, like the Porsche 911 and Corvette and become entirely LEGAL & REGISTER-ABLE cars. The modern Shelby Cobra replica cannot. Oh well.

Exactly what I was thinking when I read that, probably the worst comparison I have heard to defend his car is real...

[RodKnock]

I may have to start a poll as to which analogy is the most appropriate:

a) The present-day auto manufacturer (Challenger, Ferrari, etc.) Analogy
b) The Mona Lisa by da Vinci Analogy
c) The Rolex Watch Analogy
d) The Dolly The Sheep Cloning Analogy (Dolly was born in 1996, the Shelby Cobra replica was born 1995)

I'm voting "d."

[Jaydee]

You know

desperate when they start referencing

Huh, you're a lawyer and you make spelling mistakes as obvious as this one?
JD

[fordracing65]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

I may have to start a poll as to which analogy is the most appropriate:

a) The present-day auto manufacturer (Challenger, Ferrari, etc.) Analogy
b) The Mona Lisa by da Vinci Analogy
c) The Rolex Watch Analogy
d) The Dolly The Sheep Cloning Analogy (Dolly was born in 1996, the Shelby Cobra replica was born 1995)

I'm voting "d."

I vote A, unlike a Challenger or Camaro, his car was neither built by Ford or Shelby as a production car,, that one made me say WHAAAAAAAT...

[Al G]

[quote=RodKnock;1367126]Speaking of agendas, cough, cough, the word "genuine" as it relates to the CSX4000 replicas is not used. QUOTE]

My mistake, the word "genuine" is used in the quote from SAAC in post 513. I don't know if it also appears in the registry. However, SAAC still recognizes them as genuine.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

Then I guess since Enzo is dead new Ferraris are not genuine Ferraris nor would a continuation of the original Testarosa be a genuine Ferrari Testarosa if Ferrari chose to build them again.

Actually, Evan, Ferrari did build both a 1st Gen and 2nd Gen GTO and they do look very similar.



And I'll get those 1st Gen and Gen Testarossa pics up too.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Al G

My mistake, the word "genuine" is used in the quote from SAAC in post 513. I don't know if it also appears in the registry. However, SAAC still recognizes them as genuine.

Well, you may have found that one instance where the word "genuine" was used. And I'm very excited for you that you feel you own a "genuine" Cobra. Did you know that I also own a "genuine" Cobra? It's right there in the Registry under the section Kirkham Cobra.

Seriously, though, you gotta call "a spade a spade." Right?

Facts, Fake, Fraud. Oooh an alliteration.

[fordracing65]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

Well, you may have found that one instance where the word "genuine" was used. And I'm very excited for you that you feel you own a "genuine" Cobra. Did you know that I also own a "genuine" Cobra? It's right there in the Registry under the section Kirkham Cobra.

Seriously, though, you gotta call "a spade a spade." Right?

Facts, Fake, Fraud. Oooh an alliteration.

I own a Genuine Cobra also, Kirkham 684...but mine is not in the registry so mines not REAL...

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by fordracing65

I own a Genuine Cobra also, Kirkham 684...but mine is not in the registry so mines not REAL...

The most recent Registry had just come out when my car was born, but had not yet been sold by Kirkham to me. I bought an "inventory" car, so no owner info was recorded, just the # 539.

I feel bad for you, since #684 may never make the next Registry. I think all the modern "genuine" replicas, like the Shelbys, SPF's and Kirkhams, will be removed.

[4pipes]

Mine's in there but it's really silly. Haven't looked at it since I bought it years ago.