Should EFC start to utilise blue liverbird?

[Zatara]

LFC own the copyright of the Liverbird. Liverpool City Council can only use it because RS agreed to allow them to register it in the UK. They could have refused and left the council needing to find a new emblem.

So yes, there would be a legal challenge

That is totally bizarre, i wonder what the legal grounds were for having one of the symbols of a city (could be any city) being copyrighted by a football club.

Doesnt seem legally enforcable to me.

 

[Zatara]

To reiterate, would people be happier if we had a blue one eating a red one...or with the red one in its claws?

I reckon it would be very popular indeed

 

[Khalekan]

Birmingham used the citys name and villa didnt. Villa are by far the bigger club and bigger name in football. Nothing to do with badges, Icons or naming rights...it's success that produces recognition. We have had none for decades. We have to become a more succesful club to earn that....a bird on a crest (at this moment in time) would be moot.

Success + Good Marketing

Even in successful periods in our history, on field success was never matched by off field marketing acumen.

That is why despite being as successful and glamourous as most in the 60s when the TV boom began we fell behind our neighbours in self promotion and it is why when the Sky/EPL era began, when we were still among the clubs most likely to succeed, we were left miles behind United and Arsenal, whom up to that point had won no more league titles than us.

If and when we become successful again, that must change so that so that we do indeed produce more recognition in this modern era.

 

[Groucho]

LFC own the copyright of the Liverbird. Liverpool City Council can only use it because RS agreed to allow them to register it in the UK. They could have refused and left the council needing to find a new emblem.

So yes, there would be a legal challenge

I misunderstood previously - you're right.

This is an actual outrage. The symbol is an emblem of the city, not LFC.

Although it would appear that if you'd used the bird prior to the copyright agreement, you could be in the clear and a legal challenge may not stand up.

David France's collection has our first few sets of league winners medals, prior to 1892, and that has a blue Liver bird on it. Surely our usage prior to their existence is ok?

 

[Creature]

That is totally bizarre, i wonder what the legal grounds were for having one of the symbols of a city (could be any city) being copyrighted by a football club.

Doesnt seem legally enforcable to me.

Thought copyright was to do with intellectual property rights?

Wonder if it is a single image or multiple variations of an image they went for (as in their own design). If so then they'd have no chance of stopping us using the image above as it was dated before the rs existed and before the three graces were built.

 

[Jags..class]

Tbf the name Liverpool is more of a brand then the liver bird down to he Beatles.

 

[TheFinnFan]

What's that got to do with the stadium? Liverpool City Council are the ones who should have got the copyright in the Liverbird, but never thought it was an issue.

Completely irrelevant to link that to us getting a stadium

AGM is soon so we will see if their influence so irrelevant.

 

[nsno-chris]

That is totally bizarre, i wonder what the legal grounds were for having one of the symbols of a city (could be any city) being copyrighted by a football club.

Doesnt seem legally enforcable to me.

Well it is, you can believe what you want. But ifor Everton decided to utilise the liverbird they'd be in breach of law

 

[nsno-chris]

AGM is soon so we will see is their influence so irrelevant.

Whose influence? The RS?

 

[Jags..class]

Well it is, you can believe what you want. But ifor Everton decided to utilise the liverbird they'd be in breach of law

Agree plus someone already tried to change the ruling and lost.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/liverpool-fc-versus-everton-toffees-1490588

 

[TheFinnFan]

Whose influence? The RS?

Yes. Docks would tip the scale, they cant let it happend. First im expecting delay...then gradual withdrawal from the docks project.

 

[nsno-chris]

Thought copyright was to do with intellectual property rights?

Wonder if it is a single image or multiple variations of an image they went for (as in their own design). If so then they'd have no chance of stopping us using the image above as it was dated before the rs existed and before the three graces were built.

I think it's multiple designs, because IIRC the council had to change their design so it was separate to that of the RS under the agreement.

 

[nsno-chris]

Yes. Docks would tip the scale, they cant let it happend. First im expecting delay...then gradual withdrawal from the docks project.

Firstly, how?? They have no influential say on anything to do with planning within the city.

This is totally irrelevant from the fact they got copyright on the liverbird. The city of Liverpool should have held copyright but didn't think it was an issue

 

[nsno-chris]

Agree plus someone already tried to change the ruling and lost.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/liverpool-fc-versus-everton-toffees-1490588

Yeah I remember that going on, think it was a KEIOC fella.

Think a link to that paper is still banned mate

 

[TheFinnFan]

Firstly, how?? They have no influential say on anything to do with planning within the city.

This is totally irrelevant from the fact they got copyright on the liverbird. The city of Liverpool should have held copyright but didn't think it was an issue

Dont know but EFC wont be allowed to get game changing position in the city.