Briatore's ban overturned in French court

Evidently the questions were too difficult.

So, to show that I am fair, I'll ask a really simple one.

If, in your cut-throat industry, one of your work colleagues passed critical and current live-feed info to a direct competitor........clearly assisting said competitor and damaging your own companies competitive position..........would you expect your own company to be fined?

I belive that FIA can still stop Favio from beeing part of the F1 enviroment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Yes but they are keen to show the sport that now under Todt, they are an impartial, credible organisation. If they change the rules as Max has suggested in the Daily Telegraph, purely to keep Flav out of the sport, then they are in danger of being as comical as demonstrated in the past 3 seasons. :)

---

Risking others life is no minor crime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

I am not quite sure where you came up with that idiotic comment, but hey whatever floats your boat.

---

I apologise if my comment came out as a personal attack or insult to you. It was meant as a drawing your rather unfriendly "I wonder how those people conduct their daily business..." reasoning to its extreme. I realise in afterthought that it sounded worse than I intended.

My point was an attempt to emphasize the difference between when you think bad guys get what they deserve because who you consider a bad guy happens to also be a bad guy in the eyes of those in power, and when bad guys get penalties they deserve actually based on a trial that examines the facts and gives them a proper chance to argue their point first.

Only in the second case can you have any hope that the views on who is a "bad guy" will correspond the next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Mclaren were fined for receiving it through a rogue employee, so why weren't Ferrari fined for allowing their rogue employee pass on this information?

---

The real issue is that the intellectual property rights for the car design belong to Ferrari, not Nigel Stepney. The 'crime' is possession of that information without the copyright holder's authorisation - intellectual property theft - so only McLaren and Renault can be held liable in that respect.

Why Renault were found guilty and not fined is a very questionable matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by motetarip

The real issue is that the intellectual property rights for the car design belong to Ferrari, not Nigel Stepney. The 'crime' is possession of that information without the copyright holder's authorisation - intellectual property theft - so only McLaren and Renault can be held liable in that respect.

Why Renault were found guilty and not fined is a very questionable matter.

---

Correct on the first part.

As for the second.....do not forget that initially Mclaren were also not fined.

It was only after it emerged that Mclaren had not been honest with the FIA at the first hearing that they were fined at the second.

Renault were, unlike Mclaren, open with the FIA and, crucially, did not attempt to mislead the FIA.

This included allowing Mclaren to hand-pick the investigative IT firm to look on Renault's systems.

Furthermore, Renault were only called to one disciplinary hearing.

Oh, and also worth pointing out that Mackereth's info was not a live-feed.

Having read the WMSC decision I'd say the penalty was escaped as it was unproven or unprovable that Renault intended to incorporate McLaren design into their car. I wouldn't say that Renault were completely honest in their own internal investigation report.

McLaren do have a nasty habit of making life difficult for themselves.

The chrashgate was Flavios wrong, no doubt.

The spygate was not Rons wrongdoing, in the first place I belive, But in the second??

And the liegate, what have you done Ron!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Ron wasn't completely honest at first, but that may have been a) because he was assured by his personel that they had done nothing wrong, b) He was conducting an internal investigation and was unsure of the facts.

Flav knew about crashgate as it was impossible to be on the pitwall giving direction and have no knowledge IMO.

Liegate as far as I am aware did not involve Ron as he had stepped down by this point I do believe. It was the fault of Lewis Hamilton, Dave Ryan and the PR team. :)

---

According rumours, they was phoning Ron before the second hearing.