Quote:
Originally Posted by wnut
They did protest again, but only one car which is a bit strange given that they should be identical.
|
I read somewhere that they only protested one because only one started the race. Who knows maybe the rules don't allow you to protest a car that doesn't take the green flag.
I have also read somewhere (can't find it right now) that Ferrari has asked for clarification around the same rules that Racing Point is using to clone/reverse engineer the Mercedes.
I think it's good Ferrari has asked for clarification (for everyone). Because the ruling might be that the Racing Point is fine, but that doesn't say exactly where the line is on the strategy of reverse engineering the car. For example, lets say someone takes a consumer product. Someone else owns the IP. You measure and create a clone. It might measure slightly differently in a few places. You claim you own the IP of the clone. I can imagine the owner of the original version might challenge that assertion. The problem we have here is that Mercedes might just be perfectly OK with Racing Point cloning the car and claiming the IP as there own (effectively there is two sets of IP when we wonder if really there is only one).
Where does it stop? What if someone rolled a car through an X-ray machine or large MRI to not just examine the external details, but peer into the interior. No "plans" were provided, but you can now see the buried details. Is that OK? (I understand there are no MRI's large enough to run an entire car through, but you get my point).
How much assistance is the original IP owner allowed to provide? Can they drop an old car off for the weekend and say "Have at it boys, make sure it's back together Monday morning"? Then they could take it all apart and then they could run bits through non-destructive scanners to determine not just exterior, but interior details (with likely amazing accuracy). Sure, converting what would effectively be a detailed 3D model that into a working car would be difficult, but clearly Racing Point has shown it is possible to do and and likely on the cheap. Some non-destructive scanners may tell more than just shape, but materials as well.
I suspect Ferrari wants to understand exactly where the FIA thinks the line exists. How far down the path toward the scenarios I outline above is acceptable?
I have no strong opinions on this other than things are badly broken if to be successful you have to fully clone a competitors car. And given this is not just a drivers championship, but also a constructors championship, it somewhat makes a mockery of the concept of "constructor". I know copying ideas is a core part of racing. That "secret sauce" does not remain secret forever. But if you run a championship based upon "constructors" there needs to be some lines somewhere. Or, we just ditch (or rework) the constructors championship and allow things like customer cars. This is all about working around the prohibition on customer cars. Racing Point has a customer car that is likely a bit more expensive than if they had just bought a car from Mercedes. So now we have customer cars, but they are expensive? Is the focus now about keeping cost down? If we are going to have customer cars, then do it right.
Richard