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

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by cycleguy55

I find it hilarious that some people on this thread seem to actually be putting weight into what is printed on the title, when that content is actually decided / administered in most cases by clerks who view automobiles as transportation appliances and who seem to decide on a whim what to use as descriptors. I doubt any court would decide this issue on the basis of what was printed on the title. While considering the title, the decision would depend upon other facts in evidence which would, arguably, carry far more weight.

As REAL 1 has previously stated, his car is a replica, along with other Continuation Cobras. It is also a genuine Shelby, as it was manufactured by Shelby American and, as Shelby has exclusive rights to the Cobra name, that makes it a genuine Shelby Cobra (replica) - though universally understood it is not an original. Some comments on this thread have implied some of these terms are mutually exclusive, when clearly they are not.

Replica and genuine are mutually exclusive in my world. Logic would tell me that a replica cannot be genuine. So clearly, to me, a modern Shelby Cobra is NOT genuine but a replica.