Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 56 of 56
  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,012
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuri Laszlo
    Not true. Ferrari claims to have trademarked their shade of red. In a non-racing note, chocolate makers Cadburys(?) is the owner of color purple in New Zealand.

    And you thought it couldn't get more ridiculous than that!
    OK then. From now on , yellow siena in MINE!!!

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Tonbridge, Kent
    Posts
    101
    Like
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
    How bizarre that a simple colour scheme could be considered an issue. Having said that, to me Lotus colours are green and gold and not colours that have only previously been used due a sponsor association.

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Leeds, England
    Posts
    2,972
    Like
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    I think the best nod to Lotus' heritage (this applies to "Lotus"-Renault and Team Lotus) would be to find a sponsor, any sponsor, willing to pay large money to paint the car in their colours. Team Gunston in SA aside they pioneered the whole concept.

    Other than that... Tobacco sponsorship tends to make you want to switch brand - not start smoking.

  4. #54
    Admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Chester-le-Street, United Kingdom
    Posts
    38,577
    Like
    78
    Liked 125 Times in 92 Posts
    Trademarks such as this depend on context. So I Ferrari would be able to stop someone making sporty cars or racing cars in their colour red. Similarly Cadbury's would be able to stop someone selling food products under that colour. However they wouldn't be able to enforce a trademark for something completely unrelated, such as painting your front door that colour.
    Please 'like' our facebook page http://www.facebook.com/motorsportforums

  5. #55
    Admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Chester-le-Street, United Kingdom
    Posts
    38,577
    Like
    78
    Liked 125 Times in 92 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by V12
    I think the best nod to Lotus' heritage (this applies to "Lotus"-Renault and Team Lotus) would be to find a sponsor, any sponsor, willing to pay large money to paint the car in their colours. Team Gunston in SA aside they pioneered the whole concept.

    Other than that... Tobacco sponsorship tends to make you want to switch brand - not start smoking.
    While that is true, I still think the F1 is better without tobacco sponsors, it always made me feel slightly uneasy (only slightly!) as to where the money for my favourite sport was coming from.
    Please 'like' our facebook page http://www.facebook.com/motorsportforums

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Sunny south coast
    Posts
    16,345
    Like
    0
    Liked 26 Times in 26 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by henners88
    I just think if they can ban the Ferrari bar code on the grounds it reminds people of Marlboro, then the black and gold is just as obvious.
    I think there is a difference though.

    Philip Morris have consistently tried to work around the tobacco ban in F1 and the bar code was another example of that. They have (I think) recently renewed their deal with Ferrari and their clear aim is to promote the Marlboro brand, despite the ban.

    Renault/Lotus's use of black & gold does not involve a sponsorship deal. It is purely an historical nod to a colour scheme. It's marketing only in the sense that an existing team are trying to associate themselves with Team Lotus, just as Tony Fernandes has done with a different colour scheme.
    Riccardo Patrese - 256GPs 1977-1993

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •