UPDATED ' NEW BLUE CITY SHIRTS ' PHOTOS

Exactly. A Cardiif city shirt, tapping into the clubs market doesn't matter what you call yor iPad, if any design resemble their brand or copyright you are in trouble.

Greggs are tapping into simons bakery too. Asda are tapping into tesco customers. Superdry and tapping into hollister

Etc etc etc

Nature of business. No issue

The shirts DO NOT resemble eachother.

good luck then

With what?

Exactly. A Cardiif city shirt, tapping into the clubs market doesn't matter what you call yor iPad, if any design resemble their brand or copyright you are in trouble.

Which is one of the reasons it doesn't have any of the club's copyrights on there. Although I fail to see how it has the club's brand on there. The whole point of the shirt is to move away from the club's current brand, surely?!

As for tapping into the market... are you serious?!

Spot on.

Although upon investigating it seems the cardiff city fc trademark has lapsed and wasn't renewed anyway after the 2002 registration - probably and expensive irrelevance. The old badge is still registered as is the new one.

However this shirt doesnt resemble either anyway.

If it resembled what the club was selling then there wouldnt be any need to make it in the first place

Last edited by Roath_Magic_ on Sun Jun 01, 2014 8:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

Exactly. A Cardiif city shirt, tapping into the clubs market doesn't matter what you call yor iPad, if any design resemble their brand or copyright you are in trouble.

Greggs are tapping into simons bakery too. Asda are tapping into tesco customers. Superdry and tapping into hollister

Etc etc etc

Nature of business. No issue

The shirts DO NOT resemble eachother.

good luck then

With what?

First of all to the guys selling the shirt, then to the ones marketing them. And then to you trying to understand market branding law try selling your burgers with a big logo M for MAGIC

Will there be bigger sizes available?

First of all to the guys selling the shirt, then to the ones marketing them. And then to you trying to understand market branding law try selling your burgers with a big logo M for MAGIC

Would the M look like the mcdonalds registered trademark? If not then i would be perfectly able to stick an M on there.

Its clear that it is you that has the lack of understanding here pal

First of all to the guys selling the shirt, then to the ones marketing them. And then to you trying to understand market branding law try selling your burgers with a big logo M for MAGIC

You couldn't, if it resembled a McDonalds logo (I think that is what you are hinting at)... again, I fail to see the similarity between the club's current crest and the one used in the shirt.

They are totally different.

First of all to the guys selling the shirt, then to the ones marketing them. And then to you trying to understand market branding law try selling your burgers with a big logo M for MAGIC

You couldn't, if it resembled a McDonalds logo (I think that is what you are hinting at)... again, I fail to see the similarity between the club's current crest and the one used in the shirt.

They are totally different.

Exactly.

This would be perfectly acceptable....

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

First of all to the guys selling the shirt, then to the ones marketing them. And then to you trying to understand market branding law try selling your burgers with a big logo M for MAGIC

Would the M look like the mcdonalds registered trademark? If not then i would be perfectly able to stick an M on there.

Its clear that it is you that has the lack of understanding here pal

I am all wrong if the shirt don't resemble any registered trademark of the club, current or historical. Old badge, similar design badge, club colour, current or historical. If it in anyway resemble registered trademark or associated with it, you would need a license to produce, sell or market it. What I have been saying all along, check out who own what before doing this, or take the legal magic advice and go for it..

First of all to the guys selling the shirt, then to the ones marketing them. And then to you trying to understand market branding law try selling your burgers with a big logo M for MAGIC

Would the M look like the mcdonalds registered trademark? If not then i would be perfectly able to stick an M on there.

Its clear that it is you that has the lack of understanding here pal

I am all wrong if the shirt don't resemble any registered trademark of the club,

the shirt isnt a trademark

current or historical. Old badge, similar design badge, club colour, current or historical. If it in anyway resemble registered trademark or associated with it, you would need a license to produce, sell or market it.

it doesnt

What I have been saying all along, check out who own what before doing this, or take the legal magic advice and go for it..

and you are calling people stupid for informing you it is fine? Doesnt sound like sincere advice to me.

First of all to the guys selling the shirt, then to the ones marketing them. And then to you trying to understand market branding law try selling your burgers with a big logo M for MAGIC

Would the M look like the mcdonalds registered trademark? If not then i would be perfectly able to stick an M on there.

Its clear that it is you that has the lack of understanding here pal

I am all wrong if the shirt don't resemble any registered trademark of the club,

the shirt isnt a trademark

current or historical. Old badge, similar design badge, club colour, current or historical. If it in anyway resemble registered trademark or associated with it, you would need a license to produce, sell or market it.

it doesnt

What I have been saying all along, check out who own what before doing this, or take the legal magic advice and go for it..

and you are calling people stupid for informing you it is fine? Doesnt sound like sincere advice to me.

Yet you keep coming back as exactly that..

As exactly what?

As exactly what?

A numpty. Here are the trademarked registered. So go for it I wouldn't.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmownerid/search? ... 0002495019

As exactly what?

A numpty. Here are the trademarked registered. So go for it I wouldn't.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmownerid/search? ... 0002495019

A numpty for telling you it is perfectly legal due to it being exactly that?

And go for what?

As exactly what?

A numpty. Here are the trademarked registered. So go for it I wouldn't.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmownerid/search? ... 0002495019

A numoty for telling you it is perfectly legal due to it being exactly that?

Actually it's not. But don't let that stop you

As exactly what?

A numpty. Here are the trademarked registered. So go for it I wouldn't.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmownerid/search? ... 0002495019

A numoty for telling you it is perfectly legal due to it being exactly that?

Actually it's not. But don't let that stop you

Dont let that stop me what? Its perfectly legal, if its not they will get taken to court.

Want a wager that they wont

As exactly what?

A numpty. Here are the trademarked registered. So go for it I wouldn't.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmownerid/search? ... 0002495019

A numoty for telling you it is perfectly legal due to it being exactly that?

Actually it's not. But don't let that stop you

Dont let that stop me what? Its perfectly legal, if its not they will get taken to court.

Want a wager that they wont

It's not legal, the bluebird and bluebirds trademark is protected. Can't you read? If people want to gamble on selling and market them, go right ahead

Will there be bigger sizes available?

I hope so, because I want XXL

It's not legal, the bluebird and bluebirds trademark is protected. Can't you read? If people want to gamble on selling and market them, go right ahead

They arent the same bluebirds the the name bluebirds is trademarked against the image not a stand alone word. You cannot trademark a name of an animal unless is encompasses a logo. Maybe its you that should read... Or learn

Again, want a wager?

It's not legal, the bluebird and bluebirds trademark is protected. Can't you read? If people want to gamble on selling and market them, go right ahead

They arent the same bluebirds the the name bluebirds is trademarked against the image not a stand alone word. You cannot trademark a name of an animal. Maybe its you that should read

Again, want a wager?

Wager on what? Something I never claimed? I was right and you where wrong, now it's up to the sellers to gamble.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002316917A

Wager on what? Something I never claimed? I was right and you where wrong, now it's up to the sellers to gamble.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002329784A

The crest on the shirt and that crest are nowhere near identical.

Wager on what? Something I never claimed? I was right and you where wrong, now it's up to the sellers to gamble.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002329784A

The crest on the shirt and that crest are nowhere near identical.

Wager on what? Something I never claimed? I was right and you where wrong, now it's up to the sellers to gamble.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002329784A

The crest on the shirt and that crest are nowhere near identical.

Wrong link. Check the bluebird trade
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002316917A

Last edited by 7Summit on Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

It's not legal, the bluebird and bluebirds trademark is protected. Can't you read? If people want to gamble on selling and market them, go right ahead

They arent the same bluebirds the the name bluebirds is trademarked against the image not a stand alone word. You cannot trademark a name of an animal. Maybe its you that should read

Again, want a wager?

Wager on what? Something I never claimed? I was right and you where wrong, now it's up to the sellers to gamble.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002316917A

You have given another meaningless link. The bluebird (swift) is not the same and the trademark "bluebird" is only enforceable when encompassed with that logo - which is isnt.

Perfectly legal, you are wrong. As ive been saying all along

Wager on what? Something I never claimed? I was right and you where wrong, now it's up to the sellers to gamble.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002329784A

The crest on the shirt and that crest are nowhere near identical.

hes off his rocker with a clear agenda against this idea.

There is absolutely to copyright issue what so ever. That much is clear.

What ever happens, it wont look good for Tan and our club as they dont want it and our fans do. World Wide Publicity for our fans once again regarding our True Identity

It's not legal, the bluebird and bluebirds trademark is protected. Can't you read? If people want to gamble on selling and market them, go right ahead

They arent the same bluebirds the the name bluebirds is trademarked against the image not a stand alone word. You cannot trademark a name of an animal. Maybe its you that should read

Again, want a wager?

Wager on what? Something I never claimed? I was right and you where wrong, now it's up to the sellers to gamble.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002316917A

You have given another meaningless link. The bluebird (swift) is not the same and the trademark "bluebird" is only enforceable when encompassed with that logo - which is isnt.

Perfectly legal, you are wrong. As ive been saying all along

If you can't read you can't read, it not my problem. Remove the bluebird from the shirt and it might be..

If you can't read you can't read, it not my problem. Remove the bluebird from the shirt and it might be..

The bluebird word isnt copyrighted, only against the logo. The actual bluebird isnt the same logo that is registered so neither is the word. As karl payne will confirm, if the bird is slightly altered (which it is) then its fine, and that was the club that advised him and his tops were top notch looking

Its about learning nit reading, and you need to do it in mounds

What ever happens, it wont look good for Tan and our club as they dont want it and our fans do. World Wide Publicity for our fans once again regarding our True Identity

im amazed people are trying to be negative over fans trying to get blue gear out there.

Well done to them and well done you for promoting it to the fanbase

What ever happens, it wont look good for Tan and our club as they dont want it and our fans do. World Wide Publicity for our fans once again regarding our True Identity

im amazed people are trying to be negative over fans trying to get blue gear out there.

Well done to them and well done you for promoting it to the fanbase

Nothing in the original post was negative. It was a question on the legal issue. You said there wasn't any, but there is.
A big one. You might not want to encourage people to get into trouble taking a huge financial hit. If it looks good or bad on Tan doesn't help the guy with the bill much does it? The bluebird is protected and yet again you give ill advice!

Wager on what? Something I never claimed? I was right and you where wrong, now it's up to the sellers to gamble.
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK0002329784A

The crest on the shirt and that crest are nowhere near identical.

hes off his rocker with a clear agenda against this idea.

There is absolutely to copyright issue what so ever. That much is clear.

I own several Cardiff City t shirts that don't come from the club whilst having a bluebird and the name Cardiff City on them.
I can't see how the copyright issue would occur here as the top is not emulating or trying to be the brand that is tans Cardiff City.
In fact. Being not the same is exactly what the top is doing.


Time to get our balls out and get those tops on