No, I haven’t seen a replica car, with the exception of things like the Batmobile from the 1960s TV series or the General Lee from The Dukes of Hazzard. It doesnt surprise me that they exist though- there are certainly plenty of replica WWI and WWII aircraft out there, so I can’t see why cars would be any different.
But I think there’s a difference between a small-scale hobby industry (like converting a handful of Ford LTDs to Batmobiles or Dodge Chargers to General Lees) and completely re-starting production of a “Classic” car.
Having said that, if someone was making a modernised but otherwise faithful replica of the Kingswood, I think they’d be very popular indeed.
Don’t seem to be any Kingswood replica builders there. Actually, it looks like the Kingswood is a common donor car for Monaro replicas.
Mass manufacturing of replicas is extremely rare, but it does happen; the original Mazda MX-5/Miata is an unashamed knockoff of the original (1960s) Lotus Elan.
If only the VW logo carried such magical properties, and competitors needed to use it in order to produce competing flying cars, then, no, it could not remain exclusive as a trademark. Functional design features cannot be protected as tradmarks or trade dress. They have to be non-functional.
Sure, but the VW logo is clearly not intended to be a functional design feature. I suppose that makes my other example a bit unlikely, though.
I know- I meant it wouldn’t lose its trademark status because it made things fly, not that it isn’t a trademark now.
And no… BMW’s own literature usually mentions it in the fine print, along with the roundel (logo), but I can’t find any references to it actually being registered.
Well, I wasn’ going to claim it doesn’t have one, I just wanted to know for sure, because sometimes these things get misreported.
But I checked and it does have a few trademarked grills, for example, US registered trademark Serial Number 79037537. So, yeah, you were right on that point.
Regardless of intent, if the VW logo could make cars fly, Volkswagen could not prevent other car makers from using it. Volkswagen would lose its exclusive rights.
It uses a Browning-style linkless lockup, and was one of the first true pistols after the Hi-Power to use a dual stack magazine, but there are numerous functional differences, including:[ul][li]The standard Hi-Power is a single action pistol; the CZ-75 is double action[/li][li]The Hi-Power has the slide ride outside the frame like the 1911; the CZ-75 has the slide running on internal rails like the Sig Sauer P210[/li][li]The CZ-75 has a 15 or 16 round magazine capacity (9mmP); the Hi-Power has a 13 round magazine capcity (9mmP).[/li][li]The two pistols have slightly different grip angles[/li][li]The CZ-75 has an external extractor arm; the original Hi-Power (pre-Mark III) did not[/li][li]The Hi-Power has a magazine disconnect safety; the CZ-75 does not[/li][li]The manual safety is located in a different place on the two pistols[/li][/ul]
While the two pistols are similar (and no doubt the Koucky brothers borrowed several concepts from the Hi-Power or derivatives therefrom) the CZ-75 is as much of an original (and IMHO, slightly better) design than the Hi-Power.
Actually, it looks like the Kingswood is a common donor car for Monaro replicas.