Imagine if CPU makers prevented you from running PassMark.
Hell, imagine if car's manufacturer warranty was voided if you took it to a dynamometer.
Why do we as a society allow these absurd rent seeking practices like these? What possible social good could come from preventing discussion about an enterprise software product?
Ferrari has the right to force you to give your car back if you do anything unauthorized with it, including any modification, or any unapproved testing. This was why Deadmau5 had to give back his Purrari (he modified the logo and theme to a nyancat theme)
I can see Ferrari not selling you any new cars because you did something they don't like, but I don't see how they have e the right to force you to give your car back (which you paid for) if you modify it.
Just like with all your online services, or your software.
That sounds like sort of claim that should be backed up with some pretty significant evidence.
This is far from the first time they've done this, as subsequent google searches will attest. I'll leave this as an exercise to the reader.
> The lucky few selected to get an F50 would make a down payment of $240,000. Yes, that's right: a down payment of $240,000... on a car. After that, monthly payments were $5,600. Five thousand. Six hundred. Per month. For 24 months. And then, at the end of the lease, you owned the car -- assuming you could come up with the final payment of $150,000. Total payments over the 2-year span: $534,400. Only then could you resell your F50 and make money off the wild speculation.
I also suggest the Google query.
Some (many?) Ferrari models aren't for sale. Rather, they're indefinitely leased.