The gear teeth are cut with a file. For the angularity, draw a circle with a compass and subdivide it by measuring linearly with a measuring tool. This can be done larger than the part, and the teeth locations marked with a straightedge. By cutting the teeth where marked, you avoid a stack-up of error.
Traditionally, lack of demand and the fact that GM was fastidious about keeping them off the road means that they would probably threaten a lawsuit. Electric cars in general have only become popular in the last 5-10 years; the lore of the EV1 has grown accordingly.
Copyright law for art and sculpture requires registration of each design; in searching the copyright records it appears that GM doesn't do this. Really the more appropriate forum would be to get a design patent but those last for only 15 years anyway.
Trademarks must be registered (and also apply to specific categories, though a kit car and production car are in the same category). Surprisngly, "EV1" is owned not by GM, but by Kia (the graphic is different). What this means is you can make the (GM) EV1 logo no problem, and also sell a kit car as something like "inspired by the GM EV1" but if you sell it as an "EV1" then Kia might come knocking.
In short, I don't see much getting in the way of making an EV1 kit car as long as you don't advertise it as a literal GM or EV1 car. Though as stated, you can include or sell separately an EV1 badge that buyers can slap on their own property without issue.
I don't think that copyright would apply because the EV1 design largely serves a functional purpose, and design patent infringement would face an uphill battle for the same reasons. For copyright of a "useful article" the functional aspects of the design cannot be protected, only the artistic ("separability"). For design patents, elements of the design that are dictated by function cannot be protected (N.B., there is some nuance there for alternative designs). The strongest exposure for EV1 replicas is probably trade dress, and the iconic design ("secondary meaning") of the EV1 should strengthen those claims.
Also, trademarks do not need to be registered to be enforced, although it is wise to register them.
Already 90-95% get around without a car and the rest are paying. Car traffic is necessary to an extent. Compare how shipping companies offer Next Day Early AM shipping for 10x the cost of 4 day shipping. Hardly anyone uses it, but when you need it, you are glad to have that expensive option.
Steve Jobs did this, he got a new car every 6 months yet for years only drove a 911, then an MB SL55. Why have to learn a new car when you like what you drive?
he got the new cars every 6 months because he could avoid then putting car plates on it (california weird law on new cars) and then not be able to be given tickets when he would park on his disabled spot at cupertino
No, they always had legit California "temporary plates" for the allowable (at the time) 6 months. They were very ticketable; his motivation was to keep his car relatively anonymous when driving around. Source: Me, living near his house and walking by regularly.
This article has a picture of one of Steve Jobs' actual cars with no plates at all (temporary or otherwise). It explicitly talks about a "new" requirement for new cars to be issued temp plates. Before that, brand new cars from the dealer had a 6-month grace period.
> "From 2019, California joins most of the other states in the nation by requiring newly bought cars to be issued temporary license plates."
Right, not a plate: the 6 month temporary operating permit was taped inside the windshield, not on the back of the car, but was still ticketable. On the other hand, the car pictured is from after his death; all of his were black.
> note that they owned the parking, so its moot if they parked on a reserved spot on private property of theirs
Eh, pedantry, but you'll find that building and occupation codes dictate a certain number of disabled parking spots. You could argue that a spot that is ostensibly this, but "everyone knows" is Steve Jobs' spot, is not a disabled parking spot.
(But yes, odds of the City of Cupertino taking any issue with this whatsoever are entirely zero.)
Consider that any competent manager will value polite debate and constructive criticism far more than the empty words of "yes" men.
Guess which category "reasonable ... consideration and appreciation" falls into.
Put another way, if you read North Korean state media, you will find that they always have a reasonable level of consideration and appreciation for their government.
Occasionally I will "wash" dirty PCBs by spraying them with 50% ethanol, 50% water, then drying them with an air gun or the like to get the water off in a reasonable time.
Nearly any properly designed board will not hold residual voltage for long when disconnected from power, so the slight conductivity of tap water is a non-issue.
Makes you wonder.
reply