Posts Tagged ‘Top Gear’

The volt-head has overtaken the petrol-head – provided the batteries don’t run out…..

Thursday, March 31st, 2011

Tesla has issued proceedings against the BBC for malicious falsehood and defamation following Top Gear’s review of Tesla’s Roadster car.

The defamation claim relates to a statement that the electric car would only last 55 miles on a test track, despite the manufacturer claim of 200 miles. Tesla says the statement suggests it had “grossly misled potential purchasers” but surely most drivers know that a car’s range is reduced if driven hard, especially around a race track.

The malicious falsehood claim appears stronger. The claim states the Roadster never actually ran out of charge, despite footage showing it being pushed into a garage. Whether the footage amounts to malicious falsehood may depend on whether such footage is widely understood to be dramatised for entertainment purposes, or whether it should be taken to be a serious review of the car’s performance.

Tesla are evidently upset but litigating will only draw attention to other features of the Top Gear review, potentially exposing their cars to further negative coverage.

Posted by Giles Parsons, who specialises in intellectual property agreements and disputes relating to patents, copyright, trade marks, designs, as well as domain name disputes and reputation management.

Giles Parsons

Giles Parsons
0121 237 4557
gparsons@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 9.3/10 (3 votes cast)

Stigma continues

Friday, September 3rd, 2010

In last week’s Legal Opinion, Stig facing the dump, Browne Jacobson reported the initiation of legal proceedings by the BBC who were seeking to restrain the publication of Ben Collins’ autobiography, The Man in the White Suit, which identified Mr Collins as Top Gear’s enigmatic celebrity driver The Stig.    

By ruling of Mr Justice Morgan earlier this week, the High Court declined to grant the above relief, leaving publishers HarperCollins free to proceed with its proposed release. The Court’s reasoning is presently unknown and may remain so for some time as it is understood that judgment is to be given in private. One can only speculate, therefore, that the BBC may have been unable to show the necessary quality of confidence in Stig’s identity to persuade the Court that an injunction was appropriate (speculations about Mr Collins’ alter ego having been published as long ago as January 2009). Alternatively, HarperCollins may have successfully relied on Mr Collins’ right to freedom of expression, enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, to defeat the BBC’s application.    

Of course, just because the BBC has lost the battle for an interim injunction, doesn’t mean that it will not ultimately be entitled to compensation for what may have been a breach of an equitable and/or contractual duty of confidence by Ben Collins. If this happens, Mr Collins may find a significant proportion of his royalty income wending its way towards dear old Auntie.

Some say…  it’s not over yet!

Posted by Richard Roberts, who specialises in intellectual property law including patents, copyright, trade marks, passing off, designs and breach of confidence; regular speaker on IP issues.

Richard Roberts

Richard Roberts
0115 976 6199
rroberts@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)