• Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Liverpool FC allowed to trademarks the city's emblem

Status
Not open for further replies.
davek said:
Erm......



Cityofliverpoollogo.jpg
liverbird.gif
Click to expand...

Strokes chin , sucks a thoughtful tooth ,....

Hmmm,...
 

davek said:
Erm......



Cityofliverpoollogo.jpg
liverbird.gif
Click to expand...

What 'erm' is there? Those are two completely different designs. The one for the city of Liverpool, the only one which has any meaning to fans in the city, is on the left, and we can do with it what we like. The one developed by and for the RS, which doesn't concern us at all, and which is the sole image in question here, is on the right. I think people are looking for any excuse to have a whinge at the RS, which is annoying because it undermines our argument when they do do something laughable.
 
Last edited:
Columbia6 said:
What 'erm' is there? Those are two completely different designs. The one for the city of Liverpool, the only one which has any meaning to fans in the city, is on the left, and we can do with it what we like. The one developed by and for the RS, which doesn't concern us at all, and which is the sole image in question here, is on the right. I think people are looking for any excuse to have a whinge at the RS, which is annoying because it undermines our argument when they do do something laughable.
Click to expand...

You're having a laugh aren't you? :lol:

I tell you what, if some charity goes with the one on the left, under this new ruling Mr Purslow and his gang of commercial lawyers would be well within their rights to send a shot across the bow.

Here's Joe Anderson's words: “The Liver Bird belongs to the people of Liverpool and the council is committed to doing all it can to make sure it remains that way.”

In other words, the rules of the game have changed and disputes will necessarily result where there simply wasn't any scope for them to arise prior to the granting of a trade mark to Liverpool FC.

By the way, I accept that it'll be aimed, for the most part, at vendors looking to 'muscle in' on club merchandise, but LFC wont stop there: if they see anything with the Liver Bird logo on that they object to in any guise they'll be down on it like a ton of bricks in the name of protecting the integrity of their 'product'. In other words, they'll police if, how, when and where a civic cultural property will be displayed in future.

Of course, you can explain my position as a tribal motivated attack on our rivals if you wish, but I've already had a go at Everton over their attempt to monopolise logos etc.
 
Last edited:

Columbia6 said:
What 'erm' is there? Those are two completely different designs. The one for the city of Liverpool, the only one which has any meaning to fans in the city, is on the left, and we can do with it what we like. The one developed by and for the RS, which doesn't concern us at all, and which is the sole image in question here, is on the right. I think people are looking for any excuse to have a whinge at the RS, which is annoying because it undermines our argument when they do do something laughable.
Click to expand...

On a lighter note....

Haha, you said do-do.
 

davek said:
Basically what they did was to leave this in the long grass until a change of administration in the council, then press again. I bet a pound to a pinch of [Poor language removed] that the MP who took over from Kilfoyle, Steve Rotherham, was an envoy for them to the new Labour council. I'd like to hear what Warren Bradley's response is to this.
Click to expand...

so you`re blaming the bellwhiffs at the parks and gardens dept. for this debacle- i think its a higher up office meself
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top