Ferrari has scored a major legal victory by regaining the intellectual property rights to the legendary “Testarossa” name after nearly a decade of courtroom battles.
The decision, issued by the General Court of the European Union (EUGC) in Luxembourg, not only marks a win for the Maranello-based carmaker but also sets a significant legal precedent for historic trademarks across various industries—not just the automotive world.
How Ferrari lost the Testarossa name
The dispute dates back to 2017 when Ferrari initially lost the rights to the “Testarossa” trademark. A German toy company successfully challenged the validity of Ferrari’s claim, arguing that the automaker had failed to demonstrate “genuine use” of the name over a continuous five-year period, as required by European trademark law. Specifically, the court found that Ferrari had not used the Testarossa name commercially between 2010 and 2015.
The original Ferrari Testarossa, one of the brand’s most iconic models, was produced between 1984 and 1996, with nearly 10,000 units built. However, the gap in active production and brand usage left the trademark vulnerable to legal challenges.
The EU Court has now overturned previous decisions made by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), ruling that Ferrari retained genuine use of the Testarossa name through various means. The judges acknowledged that Ferrari continued to leverage the brand in several ways, including:
- Offering official certificates of authenticity for Testarossa vehicles;
- Selling original spare parts and accessories;
- Licensing the production of scale models and merchandise;
- Facilitating the resale of Testarossa vehicles through official Ferrari dealerships
The court emphasized that commercial activities conducted by authorized dealers and distributors, including second-hand sales, uphold the original identity of the brand. Even in the case of toys and model cars, the use of the name “Testarossa” alongside the official “licensed Ferrari product” label confirmed the exclusive nature of the trademark.
A broader impact on intellectual property law
This ruling carries wide-reaching implications beyond Ferrari. It underscores that the value of a trademark is not solely tied to current production lines but extends to the ability to monetize brand heritage through secondary markets, spare parts, and licensing agreements.
In essence, brands can now assert their intellectual property rights even after the discontinuation of a product, allowing them to capitalize on their historical legacy while safeguarding their name for the future.
