Discussion | Does copying competitors belong in Formula 1?

Rishi Wig - Editor GPblog UK

Some measure of copying is expected. Good concepts don’t go unnoticed and will have their best virtues extracted and replicated by competitors. After all, everyone wants the extra edge. In F1’s case, having the FIA comb through each and every single car upgrade’s blueprint and putting them in some sort of context is ridiculously time-consuming.

Then, the question is, at what point is the copying bad? I believe as long as the identity of one’s work is unique and relatively resolute: you’re ok. The overall design needs to be uniquely one’s own, while some small features can use some “inspiration” from here and there. Copying also can present negatives in a natural sense as well. Force India would operate with a Mercedes front end but a Red Bull-sized rear rake. This would cause a mismatch of airflow, leading to some weird performances in the 2018 season especially. Overall, it’s a grey area with no clear cut solution.

Bonne Veenstra - Editor GPblog NL

Copying in Formula 1 is nothing new. When Tyrrell introduced the hideous X-Wings in 1997, the other teams followed not much later. When McLaren came up with the F-duct in 2010, the other teams copied it shortly after as well. Now, this is not about radical design, but about copying one particular car, the Red Bull Racing RB18. Aston Martin was able to show that it had done its own research on the AMR22B and the FIA agreed. Copying other people's technical gadgets in Formula 1 is of all times and should not have to be illegal in my opinion, as long as teams can show that they have done their own research on the parts in question.

Oliver Lewis - Editor GPblog UK

Stealing and cheating are wrong. No one is going to deny that, it’s a fact! However, when it comes to “stealing” intellectual property or IP it does become a little more complex. Looking at what Aston Martin has done over the past two years, with the ‘Pink Mercedes’ and ‘Green Bull’, it’s hard to determine if it was a directly stolen IP, or reversed engineered through photos, which makes all the difference. If the IP was directly stolen through some scandal that is yet to be uncovered, it honestly would be a disgrace to the sport and put a huge blemish over the period. We saw similar stuff play out in Spygate and how that had repercussions for years to come.

However, if the recent adaptations have been done through a feat of reverse engineering, then I have nothing but respect for that. The feat to be able to redesign and create a more competitive race car from photos and limited data is amazing. So I don’t have anything against that. I don’t think that the FIA should punish teams for doing something similar, even if it is almost copying their ideas. To be able to reproduce and recreate a working F1 car in that fashion is all right despite the glaring resemblance to other cars. Although as stated earlier if the information that lead to the reproduction/inspiration of cars was obtained in a more malicious way there should be a severe punishment to whatever teams/personnel breached a set of rules in place to keep information private. So although the lines can be blurry between what is what at the time, I think it’s an important distinction for the FIA to try and make, as it could be the difference between challenging the engineers and designers to do better versus cheating for success.

Nicole Mulder - Editor GPblog NL

Participating in Formula 1 as a constructor is about technical innovation and development. Simple copying and pasting goes against that idea and, given the current budget ceiling, is also risky. Because what do you do if it doesn't work?

Developing two cars as Aston Martin claims to have done is ineffective, as the team now seems to be finding out for itself. Neither concept is allocated enough time and budget this way, and developing a competitive car becomes a major challenge. Simply copying a design and putting it on another car is also ineffective when the design was created in a totally different concept.

Copying technical concepts outright is not a good thing in any case. Teams should be able to draw inspiration from each other's designs and then develop and apply it in their own way, but that too is part of innovation.

Matt Gretton - Editor-in-Chief GPblog UK

It was always going to happen right? At the minute, we’re lucky to have so many different philosophies and interpretations of the new rules and regulations on the grid. Yet, at some point, those are going to merge together to produce roughly two or three kinds. Perhaps the surprising thing is that Aston Martin arrived with the change just five races into the season. From the outside looking in, it’s impossible to know whether or not IP was stolen. The Aston Martin and Red Bull do look very similar, but at the same time a lot is different. 

If Red Bull provides evidence that IP has been stolen then it’s clear cut. Aston Martin have done something terrible and action needs to be taken. But other than that we’re in a grey area. Surely it’s fine to look at photographs and video replays of how other teams’ cars are working? It’s definitely fine to actually have similar ideas in the first place. If you look at other sports; tactics, formations, moves and styles of play are always going to get copied and I don’t think that’s a bad thing. There’s certainly no way for the FIA to stop it.