GTA Car Designs vs Real Life: Why They Don't Get Sued

GTA VI ULTIMATE EDITION GIVEAWAY, ROAD TO 50K We are giving one person the $99.99 Ultimate Edition on PS5 or Xbox. Follow @six.insider on Instagram and comment VI on the giveaway post to enter. The prize is awarded only if we reach 50,000 followers by 18 November 2026, 23:59 CET. Full rules: https://6insider.com/giveaway --- Grand Theft Auto is full of cars you recognise instantly and that legally have nothing to do with the cars you are recognising. A Grotti that is obviously a Ferrari. A Pfister that is obviously a Porsche. A Truffade that is obviously a Bugatti. Everybody knows Rockstar changes the badge. Almost nobody knows that Rockstar's own platform says changing the badge is not enough, that Ferrari took Take-Two to court over exactly this and lost, or that a different studio used real cars under their real names, got sued by the manufacturer, and also won. This video covers all three, with the court records. WHAT IS IN IT 00:00 Four cars, named and denied 00:30 The three things this video will actually prove 01:08 Why removing the badge is the smallest part of it 01:50 Trade mark, registered design and copyright are three different rights 02:52 Ferrari v Take-Two Interactive France, in full 04:20 The fourth argument Ferrari made, which is the best part of the case 05:00 Why Ferrari lost, and the six years of appeals after it 05:14 The blender: the Turismo is four cars, and the court named them 05:54 So why does a modern GTA car look like exactly one car? 06:41 There is no 30 percent rule, and here is where the myth came from 07:41 AM General v Activision, and the question it forces 08:44 Read the brand names. That is the actual answer. 09:47 What Rockstar actually bought by inventing a car industry 10:52 Back to the car at the top THE SOURCES Ferrari v Take-Two Interactive France, Paris Court of Grande Instance, judgment 25 November 2010, over registered designs DM/043107 and DM/043108. Appeals to the Court of Cassation on 8 April 2014 and the Paris Court of Appeal on 26 January 2016. Ferrari pleaded registered design infringement, copyright, unfair and parasitic competition, and image rights, and additionally argued that the brutality and vulgarity of the game damaged its reputation. The court dismissed that as unfounded and found the differences between the Turismo and the 360 Modena prevailed. AM General LLC v Activision Blizzard, US District Court, Southern District of New York, 31 March 2020. Decided on the Rogers test. Cfx.re, the platform behind FiveM, which Rockstar owns, on real world vehicles: de-badging is described as a good first step and explicitly not compliance. On the 30 percent rule: there is no such rule in the Copyright Act or in the case law, and the figure appears to come from internal corporate and educational fair use guidance rather than from law. CREDITS Gameplay is captured Grand Theft Auto footage, used for commentary and criticism. Photographs of the Ferrari 360 Modena and the Porsche 911 are by Matti Blume and Calreyn88, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons, and are credited on screen while they appear. Music is licensed Creative Commons and credited at the end. Grand Theft Auto and all related marks are trademarks of Take-Two Interactive. This channel is not affiliated with Rockstar Games or Take-Two Interactive. This video is commentary and reporting, not legal advice. #GTA6 #GTAV #RockstarGames #GTAOnline #Ferrari #CarDesign