How do you handle the questions?

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

You are also continuing to miss the crucial point and issue.

Is your point that the SAAC Cobra Registrar, Ned Scudder, noted Cobra historian and Cobra expert, called the Shelby Continuation Cobra a REPLICA? I happen to agree with his opinion.

Evan, you own a gorgeous Shelby Cobra replica, which was built roughly 30-35 years after the original Cobras.

[REAL 1]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

Is your point that the SAAC Cobra Registrar, Ned Scudder, noted Cobra historian and Cobra expert, called the Shelby Continuation Cobra a REPLICA? I happen to agree with his opinion.

Evan, you own a gorgeous Shelby Cobra replica, which was built roughly 30-35 years after the original Cobras.

I agree. It's a technically a true replica of the original Series Cobra. No argument. See Websters. It is also a real or genuine Shelby Cobra in its own right. I'll not only cite the World Registry of Cobras & GT40s but guess what...... we can also through in the Federal decisions (which PaulF and JoesGarage consider determinative as deciding these issues) dealing with the Shelby litigation on trade dress and trade mark as supporting precedent in the "holdings" and "findings" not just mere "dicta". Thanks for reminding me PaulF and JoesGarage!!!

An LA Exotics for example does not even rise to the level of "replica" if we are using the predominant definition as contained in Websters as used by the Registry.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

I agree. It's a technically a true replica of the original Series Cobra. No argument.

Dear all, I think we are done here.

[jhv48]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

Dear all, I think we are done here.

I think we're in overtime now.

Basically, Evan agrees his car is not an original, 60's cobra.
He also agrees that his is a genuine Shelby Continuation cobra.
And finally, he agrees his is a replica.

The only thing he fudges on is his choice of words when asked "the question".
He tells the truth, but not the whole truth, thus leaving the inquisitor with the impression that he is looking at an original, 60's era, Shelby Cobra.
Being a lawyer, you would think he would be able to answer "the question" completely and truthfully so that the person asking the question understood that he was not, in fact, looking at an original Shelby cobra but a replica of an original Shelby cobra made by Shelby.

Evan, you spend all this time and money on a car that, at best, is still a copy of an original. And then you choose (through omission of pertinent information) to let others believe it too.

Why don't you just buy an original and be done with it? Pony up and then you won't have to mislead the public any longer. You'll be able to answer "the question" truthfully by simply saying "YES".

[REAL 1]

Originally Posted by jhv48

I think we're in overtime now.

Basically, Evan agrees his car is not an original, 60's cobra.
He also agrees that his is a genuine Shelby Continuation cobra.
And finally, he agrees his is a replica.

The only thing he fudges on is his choice of words when asked "the question".
He tells the truth, but not the whole truth, thus leaving the inquisitor with the impression that he is looking at an original, 60's era, Shelby Cobra.
Being a lawyer, you would think he would be able to answer "the question" completely and truthfully so that the person asking the question understood that he was not, in fact, looking at an original Shelby cobra but a replica of an original Shelby cobra made by Shelby.

Evan, you spend all this time and money on a car that, at best, is still a copy of an original. And then you choose (through omission of pertinent information) to let others believe it too.

Why don't you just buy an original and be done with it? Pony up and then you won't have to mislead the public any longer. You'll be able to answer "the question" truthfully by simply saying "YES".

I never disagreed on the "technical replica" issue. Of course its a replica of the same Shelby Cobra of the original series. How else would it be a Cobra? It is a continuation of SAI production in a different time and place but the same car with some changes in materials and suppliers.

The "kit" debate and the "replica" debate are side shows. The focal point and central point is the fact the Continuation Series are true genuine Shelby Cobras. The fact that Joe Public in most cases is unaware of the Continuation Series or that his "question" is it a "kit" or "replica" is an indirect way of asking if the car is an "original" does not in any way detract, subtract, dilute, change or modify the fact the Continuation Shelby is a real Cobra. Factually and legally. None of your semantics or machinations will change that. You can keep trying though.

Both the World Registry and the federal decisions that struck down Shelby's claim on the trade dress is as to shape upheld and protected the trademark claims of Shelby as to the marks, Cobra/Shelby name, emblems etc...Only one car can legally bear and carry the Cobra/Shelby name and emblems from its manufacturer are in unison on this issue.

I don't "fudge" anything when asked about my car a bit. I am honest and tell them what the car is as noted above. Invariably I also explain Shelby began manufacturing Cobras again in 1996. Believe it or not more than you think have heard of the Continuation series.

It is absolutely comical that you are wagging your finger at me about "fudging" when my descriptions and discussions with inquisitors are factually accurate and fair when a quick perusal of the thread on vanity plates quickly discloses many here are down right lying about what their car is right on their license plate

BTW Jhv8 whats on your license plate? I think I'll go look. I recall you did post something there.

Cheers.

[jhv48]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

BTW Jhv8 whats on your license plate? I think I'll go look.
Cheers.

I must have hit a nerve. No matter how many words you throw at the subject, your car still isn't an original. And if you are really that passionate about it, buy an original.

And, since you asked, my plate says 427-SNAK. and when asked if mine is real, I reply "no, it's a replica." I guess my ego is smaller than yours.

[REAL 1]

Originally Posted by jhv48

I must have hit a nerve. No matter how many words you throw at the subject, your car still isn't an original. And if you are really that passionate about it, buy an original.

And, since you asked, my plate says 427-SNAK. and when asked if mine is real, I reply "no, it's a replica." I guess my ego is smaller than yours.

Hit a nerve???? Don't flatter yourself. You are asute though in observing my Cobra is not an original series Cobra. My passion is satisfied just fine and fully with my Continuation Shelby. Thanks though.

Yes, I know what your plate is. The plate is intentionally misleading in one respect and just flate false in the other. First, your car doesn't have a real 427. Its a stroked short block. When people ask is that a 427 you know they are asking....that' rights..., they really want to know if it's an original real FE427SO not some run of the mill stoked 351. Second the clear reference to 'snake' in the plate clearly says your car is a Cobra which is false in every respect.

There are many others here with misleading plates and they know who they are some of whom hypocritically saying what they are saying in this thread. This is just too "rich". Classic Club Cobra. My sides hurt from laughing. Seriously.

Seems like you are the one that longs for a Shelby Cobra rather then a copy of one. Your only cure is to pony up. Your plate says it all.

Oh, BTW your response telling people it's a replica is "technically misleading" too. See Websters. Also the Registry. You should simply say its a fake Cobra. Technically accurate and true, however, since by asking if its a "replica" you take it as really asking if its a fake I guess your good.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

I agree. It's a technically a true replica of the original Series Cobra. No argument.

Everyone, this was settled several pages back. Evan owns a REPLICA. He admits it and said "No argument."

When you bring something back 30+ years later, it's a clone, replica, etc. NOT the same company, NOT the same parts, NOT the same employees, NOT the same process(es), sales, licensing, registration, production or otherwise.

We're done. The rest is word play.