Turk:
I'm not lushing it up. I doubt BT and Dan are either. Just some light hearted kidding on a subject some people take a little too serious and personal. While it would be sad to see a court order all the "molds chopped up" the world would not come to cataclysmic end and life would go on for all of us even if that did happen. We would all eventually get over it (I think).
As to your questions that "some of us want to know" we are all on this forum just speculating at the answers to your posed questions. No one here can give you the definite answer you seek. You are asking for legal opinions which may differ.
But since you asked here is my legal opinion. Superformance was sued because they continue to flaunt the fact that they don't make kits they make "Cobras" at least in the ads I have seen . Quite simply they don't make Cobras and never did. They make a replica of a Cobra. Second they make rollers that are nearly complete and sold through dealers. FFR makes only kits sold directly by FFR sans dealer. Two different spectrums of the market. I don't think the quality issue has anything to do with the claims against them based on what I understand to be the legal issues. The issues as I understand them are the right to the trade dress (body shape) and the right to call the vehicle a Cobra or Shelby Cobra and use the logos.
With those two companies they basically hit all others similarly situated. Therefore if they win and factually the FFR and SPF cases are factually similar to what would be the facts in future cases against other companies the other MFG's would probably have to give in and cry uncle especially since the claims as I understand are for the most part based on Federal law.
Criminal law is different than Civil. One involves violations of law established by the State in Statutes and Code that if violated are considered violations against the sovereign. The other involves tortious interference with anothers rights or damage to others usually based on common law (Court decisions). Sometimes they can overlap. Driving drunk and hitting someone while drunk would involve criminal implications and civil by the victim for the injuries. Each would be resolved separately, with the State the plaintiff in the criminal matter and the victim the plaintiff in the civil case.
Taking people to jail for DUI is a different issue than keeping them in jail. Probable cause for arrest vs. constitutional right to bail. The example you posed using DUI is not on point for the issues involved here.
You sir are correct. SAI's plans I believe are the same for all the manufacturers as for FFR and SPF. My opinion. Their decision to bring suit against FFR and SPF factually covers just about all of the others. It was probably the most cost efficient way to proceed. Nothing wrong with that.
I have posted my opinion as to the claims themselves above. No need to repeat that. But if SAI wins look at the bright side. Your ERA just jumped substantially in value. Every dark cloud has a silver lining.
Speed Waxer.
Care for a drink?
Hybrid Mode
