UPDATED ' NEW BLUE CITY SHIRTS ' PHOTOS

Jupiter, 100% correct my purpose of this protest is not commercial, its from my heart and love for our Identity

But I cant expect others to put time and money in and loose out and some need to be paid for their time as long as they are not ripping fans of

If you want to personally do what your posts suggest, this forum will support you

Seeing as I think it is better to have one protest shirt rather than several different styles, I'll buy one a couple. How do we order...sizes etc...?

The person himself is coming on here Thurs or Friday

[quote="Green Arrow"]Well done on infringing intellectual property rights.

[/quote

lol

Well done on infringing intellectual property rights.

[/quote

lol

Chucky baby will probably grass on you.
I agree though go for it, I will buy one.

Well done on infringing intellectual property rights.

[/quote

lol

Chucky baby will probably grass on you.
I agree though go for it, I will buy one.

For posts like that I can easily forgive you when you call me twatman lol

Well done on infringing intellectual property rights.

Shhh James otherwise you might get labelled as being negative and against returning to blue

Or just being wrong

I wasn't going to get involved in this thread but to avoid confusion I thought I'd clarify a few things:

First off, good luck to whoever is producing the shirt displayed in the original post. They've clearly put a lot of a time and effort into the project. It's hard work and time consuming.

Personally, I've been driving another 'alternative' shirt project for the past few weeks involving the supporters trust (they have their own bluebird logo which can be legitimately used) and other supporter representative bodies.

We've got full local media backing to publicise the launch and a major UK based supplier on board to handle the logistics. They will also help to promote the shirt launch nationally. We are also working in partnership with Ty Hafan and all of the profits from the venture will go to them.

We will have several designs to put before the fans in a poll and their favourite design will then be produced.

We anticipate that the shirt chosen by the supporters will be available to order in the next 2-3 weeks with delivery well in advance of the summer holidays. It will be available in kids/ladies and adult men's sizes.

This is the option that should be supported

When can I get one ?

I wasn't going to get involved in this thread but to avoid confusion I thought I'd clarify a few things:

First off, good luck to whoever is producing the shirt displayed in the original post. They've clearly put a lot of a time and effort into the project. It's hard work and time consuming.

Personally, I've been driving another 'alternative' shirt project for the past few weeks involving the supporters trust (they have their own bluebird logo which can be legitimately used) and other supporter representative bodies.

We've got full local media backing to publicise the launch and a major UK based supplier on board to handle the logistics. They will also help to promote the shirt launch nationally. We are also working in partnership with Ty Hafan and all of the profits from the venture will go to them.

We will have several designs to put before the fans in a poll and their favourite design will then be produced.

We anticipate that the shirt chosen by the supporters will be available to order in the next 2-3 weeks with delivery well in advance of the summer holidays. It will be available in kids/ladies and adult men's sizes.

This is the option that should be supported

I cant wait to see the different designs, backing this idea all the way

The white kind of stripe across the top makes it for me, great job to whoever made this.

Can i ask,
why do we all supposedly support Cardiff City Fc come good or Bad, and are buying from an outside source as any money taken by the Club is used for the benefit of the Club for the masses, [ Us to watch football ] but the money taken by this shirt is going where, into some one elses pocket to make them a couple of quid.

Can i ask,
why do we all supposedly support Cardiff City Fc come good or Bad, and are buying from an outside source as any money taken by the Club is used for the benefit of the Club for the masses, [ Us to watch football ] but the money taken by this shirt is going where, into some one elses pocket to make them a couple of quid.

Exactly!

Can i ask,
why do we all supposedly support Cardiff City Fc come good or Bad, and are buying from an outside source as any money taken by the Club is used for the benefit of the Club for the masses, [ Us to watch football ] but the money taken by this shirt is going where, into some one elses pocket to make them a couple of quid.

its unfortunate..........i would fully agree normally, but no matter how much you would like to support your local butcher,if you have beef on Sunday,and have forever and a day, but he refuses to sell it, insisting chicken is better for you....you will just buy beef elsewhere.......

The copyright is not water-tight. It is for a "black" bluebird, not a blue one as on this shirt.

I think this recent judgement says this is not the case;-

"The relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours

1. The judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") in Case C-252/12, Specsavers International Healthcare Limited and Others v Asda Stores Limited indicates that:

"Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that where a Community trade mark is not registered in colour, but the proprietor has used it extensively in a particular colour or combination of colours with the result that it has become associated in the mind of a significant portion of the public with that colour or combination of colours, the colour or colours which a third party uses in order to represent a sign alleged to infringe that trade mark are relevant in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion or unfair advantage under that provision.

Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that the third party making use of a sign which allegedly infringes the registered trade mark is itself associated, in the mind of a significant portion of the public, with the colour or particular combination of colours which it uses for the representation of that sign is relevant to the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion and unfair advantage for the purposes of that provision."

2. The judgment concerns Community trade marks and proceedings under Community Trade Mark Regulation 207/2009. However, it is applicable, by analogy, to the interpretation of the corresponding provisions of the Trade Mark Directive, and therefore to the interpretation of national law implementing those provisions.

3. The CJEU judgment relates to the relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours. It confirms that such use of colour may be taken into account as a relevant factor when considering the likelihood of confusion, detriment or unfair advantage being taken of the registered black and white mark.

4. The judgment also confirms that the established use of a later mark in a particular colour or colours may also be taken into account when assessing such matters in the context of infringement."

Sorry for the legal language used which can be difficult to interpret, but it seems to me that para 3 says that the badge on the shirt would be infringing the club's rights in the bluebird device mark.

I worked in the Trade Marks Registry for twenty years before I retired in 2009 and I know the guidelines at that time were that even though marks were registered in black and white, the owners of those marks also had rights in other colour combinations used unless they specifically limited themselves to a particular colour or combination of colours.

The copyright is not water-tight. It is for a "black" bluebird, not a blue one as on this shirt.

I think this recent judgement says this is not the case;-

"The relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours

1. The judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") in Case C-252/12, Specsavers International Healthcare Limited and Others v Asda Stores Limited indicates that:

"Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that where a Community trade mark is not registered in colour, but the proprietor has used it extensively in a particular colour or combination of colours with the result that it has become associated in the mind of a significant portion of the public with that colour or combination of colours, the colour or colours which a third party uses in order to represent a sign alleged to infringe that trade mark are relevant in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion or unfair advantage under that provision.

Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that the third party making use of a sign which allegedly infringes the registered trade mark is itself associated, in the mind of a significant portion of the public, with the colour or particular combination of colours which it uses for the representation of that sign is relevant to the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion and unfair advantage for the purposes of that provision."

2. The judgment concerns Community trade marks and proceedings under Community Trade Mark Regulation 207/2009. However, it is applicable, by analogy, to the interpretation of the corresponding provisions of the Trade Mark Directive, and therefore to the interpretation of national law implementing those provisions.

3. The CJEU judgment relates to the relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours. It confirms that such use of colour may be taken into account as a relevant factor when considering the likelihood of confusion, detriment or unfair advantage being taken of the registered black and white mark.

4. The judgment also confirms that the established use of a later mark in a particular colour or colours may also be taken into account when assessing such matters in the context of infringement."

Sorry for the legal language used which can be difficult to interpret, but it seems to me that para 3 says that the badge on the shirt would be infringing the club's rights in the bluebird device mark.

I worked in the Trade Marks Registry for twenty years before I retired in 2009 and I know the guidelines at that time were that even though marks were registered in black and white, the owners of those marks also had rights in other colour combinations used unless they specifically limited themselves to a particular colour or combination of colours.

That would appear to be clear cut.

The copyright is not water-tight. It is for a "black" bluebird, not a blue one as on this shirt.

I think this recent judgement says this is not the case;-

"The relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours

1. The judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") in Case C-252/12, Specsavers International Healthcare Limited and Others v Asda Stores Limited indicates that:

"Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that where a Community trade mark is not registered in colour, but the proprietor has used it extensively in a particular colour or combination of colours with the result that it has become associated in the mind of a significant portion of the public with that colour or combination of colours, the colour or colours which a third party uses in order to represent a sign alleged to infringe that trade mark are relevant in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion or unfair advantage under that provision.

Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that the third party making use of a sign which allegedly infringes the registered trade mark is itself associated, in the mind of a significant portion of the public, with the colour or particular combination of colours which it uses for the representation of that sign is relevant to the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion and unfair advantage for the purposes of that provision."

2. The judgment concerns Community trade marks and proceedings under Community Trade Mark Regulation 207/2009. However, it is applicable, by analogy, to the interpretation of the corresponding provisions of the Trade Mark Directive, and therefore to the interpretation of national law implementing those provisions.

3. The CJEU judgment relates to the relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours. It confirms that such use of colour may be taken into account as a relevant factor when considering the likelihood of confusion, detriment or unfair advantage being taken of the registered black and white mark.

4. The judgment also confirms that the established use of a later mark in a particular colour or colours may also be taken into account when assessing such matters in the context of infringement."

Sorry for the legal language used which can be difficult to interpret, but it seems to me that para 3 says that the badge on the shirt would be infringing the club's rights in the bluebird device mark.

I worked in the Trade Marks Registry for twenty years before I retired in 2009 and I know the guidelines at that time were that even though marks were registered in black and white, the owners of those marks also had rights in other colour combinations used unless they specifically limited themselves to a particular colour or combination of colours.

That would appear to be clear cut.

Thanks, I am wrong

Jupiter, 100% correct my purpose of this protest is not commercial, its from my heart and love for our Identity

But I cant expect others to put time and money in and loose out and some need to be paid for their time as long as they are not ripping fans of

If you want to personally do what your posts suggest, this forum will support you

Seeing as I think it is better to have one protest shirt rather than several different styles, I'll buy one a couple. How do we order...sizes etc...?

The person himself is coming on here Thurs or Friday

Based on the recent posts, I won't be getting this shirt now.

The copyright is not water-tight. It is for a "black" bluebird, not a blue one as on this shirt.

I think this recent judgement says this is not the case;-

"The relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours

1. The judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") in Case C-252/12, Specsavers International Healthcare Limited and Others v Asda Stores Limited indicates that:

"Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that where a Community trade mark is not registered in colour, but the proprietor has used it extensively in a particular colour or combination of colours with the result that it has become associated in the mind of a significant portion of the public with that colour or combination of colours, the colour or colours which a third party uses in order to represent a sign alleged to infringe that trade mark are relevant in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion or unfair advantage under that provision.

Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that the third party making use of a sign which allegedly infringes the registered trade mark is itself associated, in the mind of a significant portion of the public, with the colour or particular combination of colours which it uses for the representation of that sign is relevant to the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion and unfair advantage for the purposes of that provision."

2. The judgment concerns Community trade marks and proceedings under Community Trade Mark Regulation 207/2009. However, it is applicable, by analogy, to the interpretation of the corresponding provisions of the Trade Mark Directive, and therefore to the interpretation of national law implementing those provisions.

3. The CJEU judgment relates to the relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours. It confirms that such use of colour may be taken into account as a relevant factor when considering the likelihood of confusion, detriment or unfair advantage being taken of the registered black and white mark.

4. The judgment also confirms that the established use of a later mark in a particular colour or colours may also be taken into account when assessing such matters in the context of infringement."

Sorry for the legal language used which can be difficult to interpret, but it seems to me that para 3 says that the badge on the shirt would be infringing the club's rights in the bluebird device mark.

I worked in the Trade Marks Registry for twenty years before I retired in 2009 and I know the guidelines at that time were that even though marks were registered in black and white, the owners of those marks also had rights in other colour combinations used unless they specifically limited themselves to a particular colour or combination of colours.

Thanks for explaining that. I had my concerns I just hope the person(s) producing them realise the mistakes they could be making before it gets serious for them

Tbe club take away our traditional colour and badge. So the fans produce a traditional shirt of there own. What is wrong with that ?
Good on the guy. If you dont like dont buy simples really.

The copyright is not water-tight. It is for a "black" bluebird, not a blue one as on this shirt.

I think this recent judgement says this is not the case;-

"The relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours

1. The judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") in Case C-252/12, Specsavers International Healthcare Limited and Others v Asda Stores Limited indicates that:

"Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that where a Community trade mark is not registered in colour, but the proprietor has used it extensively in a particular colour or combination of colours with the result that it has become associated in the mind of a significant portion of the public with that colour or combination of colours, the colour or colours which a third party uses in order to represent a sign alleged to infringe that trade mark are relevant in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion or unfair advantage under that provision.

Article 9(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that the third party making use of a sign which allegedly infringes the registered trade mark is itself associated, in the mind of a significant portion of the public, with the colour or particular combination of colours which it uses for the representation of that sign is relevant to the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion and unfair advantage for the purposes of that provision."

2. The judgment concerns Community trade marks and proceedings under Community Trade Mark Regulation 207/2009. However, it is applicable, by analogy, to the interpretation of the corresponding provisions of the Trade Mark Directive, and therefore to the interpretation of national law implementing those provisions.

3. The CJEU judgment relates to the relevance of colour to a mark registered in black and white but used extensively in a particular colour or colours. It confirms that such use of colour may be taken into account as a relevant factor when considering the likelihood of confusion, detriment or unfair advantage being taken of the registered black and white mark.

4. The judgment also confirms that the established use of a later mark in a particular colour or colours may also be taken into account when assessing such matters in the context of infringement."

Sorry for the legal language used which can be difficult to interpret, but it seems to me that para 3 says that the badge on the shirt would be infringing the club's rights in the bluebird device mark.

I worked in the Trade Marks Registry for twenty years before I retired in 2009 and I know the guidelines at that time were that even though marks were registered in black and white, the owners of those marks also had rights in other colour combinations used unless they specifically limited themselves to a particular colour or combination of colours.

Thanks for explaining that. I had my concerns I just hope the person(s) producing them realise the mistakes they could be making before it gets serious for them

Cheers, unfortunately for those behind it, the more successful their shirt is, the more likely it becomes that the club might take action against them.

Tbe club take away our traditional colour and badge. So the fans produce a traditional shirt of there own. What is wrong with that ?
Good on the guy. If you dont like dont buy simples really.

Spot on Nukes

Cut all the political bullshit. You like = you buy, you dont like = dont buy . Really is that simple. Sure the guy making these must have thought about any problems before going ahead with it.

I`m definitely interested, loving the visit Wales sponsor, that`ll surely get on Vinny`s nerves, when they outsell and out number his own official visit Malaysia abomination version on match days!

Cut all the political bullshit. You like = you buy, you dont like = dont buy . Really is that simple. Sure the guy making these must have thought about any problems before going ahead with it.

Political bullshit? It is about being a sensible adult thinking about consequences of your actions. Surely there are to many kids here not able to do so, but this could ruin his life and he is being ill advised and motivated. Little comfort though that powerful companies like Magic Burgers and The Annis Bookstore will help him paying damages if he gets unlucky.

Tbe club take away our traditional colour and badge. So the fans produce a traditional shirt of there own. What is wrong with that ?
Good on the guy. If you dont like dont buy simples really.

Spot on Nukes

Spot on. Completely different things.

It isnt a replica shirt and doesnt claim to be. Nothing is similar apart from the bluebird which is not identical in which winning any lawsuit isnt guaranteed - we also know of similar historical evidence regarding dealings with the club that there is nothing they will will do if the bird isnt identical - which it isnt.

Well done to the bloke.

Yes, the badges look nothing alike and totally different logos, and one is tilted at least 5 degree. Dont se what any replica shirt has to do with anything with the listing below, but what the hell right. The burger flipper have wagered to cover the legal bills anyways since he is right, so no worries there neither. The good old risk to ratio preach The name Blubird/bluebirds have the same protection, but its only a bird right.

Bluebird.jpg

Skjermbilde 2014-06-04 kl. 01.42.21.png

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

All I know is I cant wait for my children to have a BLUE City top to wear again

Yes, the badges look nothing alike and totally different logos, and one is tilted at least 5 degree. Dont se what any replica shirt has to do with anything with the listing below, but what the hell right. The burger flipper have wagered to cover the legal bills anyways since he is right, so no worries there neither. The good old risk to ratio preach The name Blubird/bluebirds have the same protection, but its only a bird right.

Bluebird.jpg

Skjermbilde 2014-06-04 kl. 01.42.21.png

Nope im afraid im not seeing it, a swift is going to look like a swift..... Because its a swift. They are not the same logos and have been slightly altered - a request made by the club when dealing with the last blue shirt to be released by fellow poster karl payne and funky rooster.

Which bit is confusing you?

.... Oh and what is this burger flipper thing you are talking about? Bizarre to say the least

Are you angrily ranting about nothing because you are wrong young man? Tut tut.

Top shirt, top idea, top effort and all above board as confirmed by the club in historical dealings

When are they orderable Annis?

If the club try and go down the legal route how's that story going to go down in the press? I'd imagine the club would want nothing to do with these shirts!