Some disputes are fought less over what has been done than over what might be done, and this one, between Jaguar Land Rover and BYD, is a case in point. A Dutch court has ruled that files gathered in a surprise raid on BYD's Netherlands offices must be destroyed, reasoning that no Ti7 has yet reached European roads and so no harm can yet be shown. The quarrel itself is an old one in a new shape: a storied British off-roader, its silhouette and ambitions echoed by a rising Chinese maker, and a question that the law has not yet answered about where inspiration ends and imitation begins. For now
Court orders JLR to destroy data seized in BYD Defender copycat case
No sales in the EU means no damage yet, the court said.
Mark
Why does a ruling about destroying files matter more than the copying claim itself?
Mimi
Because it shows how far a carmaker can go before it has proof. JLR raided two BYD offices without warning, and the court has now said that was more than this stage required.
Luke
Careful, though. The court did not say JLR is wrong about the copying. No infringement has been proven either way.
Mark
What was the court's main reasoning?
Mimi
That BYD isn't selling the Ti7 in the EU, and nobody disputes that. So any threatened infringement can't have caused JLR damage yet.
Luke
That's the court's reasoning as reported. We don't have the full ruling, so we can't say how much weight it gave to other factors.
Mark
BYD's lawyers called it a fishing expedition.
Mimi
They did, and the judges' view that the retrieval was unnecessary lines up with that. But it is still a characterisation from one side.
Luke
And the claim that BYD stripped down a Defender to reverse-engineer it is JLR's allegation. Nothing here confirms it.
Mark
What happens to the files?
Mimi
JLR has 24 hours to destroy them or risk a fine of up to half a million euros.
Luke
We don't know whether JLR will appeal or has already complied. Neither company is commenting.
Mark
And the Chery partnership?
Mimi
It adds irony. JLR is guarding its designs against one Chinese firm while selling a Freelander 8 built with another.
Il Polso
- A surprise raid on BYD's Dutch offices in August seized development files on the Ti7 without any warning to the target.
- JLR accuses the Ti7 of being a 'slavish imitation' of the Defender, and claims a stripped-down Defender was used for reverse-engineering.
- The Hague court has ordered the seized materials destroyed within 24 hours, under threat of a fine of up to half a million euros.
- The court found the retrieval unnecessary because BYD has not sold the Ti7 in the EU, so no infringement has yet been proven and no damage has occurred.
- Both companies are silent, and the substantive infringement question remains undecided, with the Ti7's possible EU launch the next thing to watch.
Some disputes are fought less over what has been done than over what might be done, and this one, between Jaguar Land Rover and BYD, is a case in point. A Dutch court has ruled that files gathered in a surprise raid on BYD's Netherlands offices must be destroyed, reasoning that no Ti7 has yet reached European roads and so no harm can yet be shown. The quarrel itself is an old one in a new shape: a storied British off-roader, its silhouette and ambitions echoed by a rising Chinese maker, and a question that the law has not yet answered about where inspiration ends and imitation begins. For now the files are to be burned, and the larger question waits for a ruling still to come.
A Dutch court has ordered Jaguar Land Rover to destroy a cache of digital files it seized from BYD's offices in the Netherlands. JLR has 24 hours to comply, or face a fine of up to half a million euros.
The files were taken in August during an ex parte raid, meaning BYD received no warning. JLR's bailiffs visited the company's offices in Schiedam and Hoofddorp, aiming to secure data before it could be deleted. Among the material recovered were development files on the Ti7, along with financial records.
Behind the raid lies JLR's claim that the Ti7 copies the Land Rover Defender, with what it calls "copyright infringement and slavish imitation." The British firm alleges BYD went further than exterior design, stripping down a Defender to reverse-engineer it. No infringement has yet been proven.
BYD's lawyers called the operation a "fishing expedition," and the judges agreed that retrieving the documents was unnecessary at this stage. Neither side disputes that BYD has not sold the Ti7 in the EU, so the alleged threat cannot yet have caused JLR any damage.
The episode follows a pattern. JLR previously won a case against the makers of the LandWind X7, which resembled the Range Rover Evoque, and Defender-style vehicles are now common in China. Expected to cost around £50,000 and similar in length to the Defender 110, the Ti7 uses a plug-in hybrid rather than the Defender's six-cylinder or V8 engines.
The irony is not lost on observers: while defending its designs against BYD, JLR has formed a joint venture with another Chinese giant, Chery, to produce the Freelander 8. The substantive infringement question remains open, and what matters next is whether the Ti7 ever goes on sale in Europe.
A Dutch court has told Jaguar Land Rover to destroy a cache of digital files it took from BYD's offices in the Netherlands. The order, from the District Court of The Hague, gives JLR 24 hours from the ruling to comply. If it does not, it faces a fine of up to half a million euros.
The files came from a raid in August. JLR bailiffs carried out an ex parte seizure, meaning BYD was given no prior warning, at the company's offices in Schiedam and Hoofddorp. The aim was to secure data before BYD could potentially delete it. JLR is said to have recovered files on the development of the Ti7, along with company financial data.
Behind the raid is JLR's accusation that BYD's Ti7 is a copy of the Land Rover Defender. The British firm alleges "copyright infringement and slavish imitation with respect to the Defender." It also claims that BYD did more than copy the exterior design: it is said to have stripped down an example of the Defender to reverse-engineer it. The Ti7 is sold in China as the Fang Cheng Bao Tai 7. No infringement of intellectual property rights has yet been proven.
BYD's lawyers called the operation a "fishing expedition." The court's reasoning went in a similar direction. The judges held that retrieving the documents was unnecessary at this stage to prove any infringement. They also noted that it is not in dispute between the parties that BYD does not currently offer the Ti7 on the EU market, and has not already sold it there. In the court's words, the alleged threatened infringement therefore cannot yet have caused JLR any damage.
Both companies are staying quiet. JLR told Auto Express it does not comment on ongoing legal proceedings. A BYD UK spokesperson declined to comment for the same reason.
The dispute fits a longer pattern. The LandWind X7 looked so much like the Range Rover Evoque that JLR won a legal action against its makers. More recently, JLR's designs appear to have been a frequent source of inspiration for Chinese carmakers. Many Defender-style vehicles are on sale in China, and the popular Jaecoo 7 has become known in the UK as the 'Temu Range Rover.'
Comparisons between the Ti7 and the Defender have been widespread since the SUV was confirmed for the UK. At five metres long, it is similar in size to the Defender 110. Its expected price of around £50,000 would undercut the cheapest 110 by about £20,000. It lacks the Defender's available six-cylinder and V8 engines, using instead a 1.5-litre petrol engine as part of a plug-in hybrid system. A fully electric Ti7 has been announced in China, but it is not known whether it will reach the UK.
There is one more twist. While defending its intellectual property against BYD, JLR has entered a joint venture with another Chinese giant, Chery. The resulting Freelander 8 SUV will be sold in the UK. What to watch now is the substantive infringement question, which the court has not decided, and whether the Ti7 actually goes on sale in the EU.
Citazioni salienti
It is not in dispute between the parties that BYD does not currently offer the Ti7 on the market in the European Union, so the alleged threatened infringement cannot yet have led to any damage.— District Court of The Hague (as quoted by Auto Express)
JLR does not comment on ongoing legal proceedings.— Jaguar Land Rover, to Auto Express
Vuoi la storia completa?
Leggi l'originale su Auto Express ↗