LIVERPOOL Football Club will face “difficulties” registering the Liverbird as its trade mark, an expert in intellectual property rights said last night.
One of the city’s design and marketing agencies warned that if the club got a trade mark it would spell bad news for hundreds of businesses in the city.
It comes after the Daily Post reported how LFC had applied for a trade mark of the famous bird which forms a key part of its club badge.
Liverpool City Council is taking legal advice on the matter with a view to lodging an objection with the UK Intellectual Property Office before the deadline for doing so expires on Saturday.
Liverpool FC claims it is only seeking to trade mark its own version of the Liverbird because the club is losing a “substantial amount of money” each year due to counterfeit merchandise. The club insists it would not try to prevent the council, business, charities or other bodies using the Liverbird logo.
David Worrall, senior solicitor with Liverpool’s Shipley Solicitors, last night warned the club that the version of the Liverbird it was seeking to trademark was quite generic.
“I would expect that if people do challenge it through the opposition process, the football club will face difficulties in registering this. It’s not cut and dry, they might get it if nobody opposes it. But I am sure there are plenty of people thinking about doing it.
“I think a lot of people feel that it belongs to the public and not a company, no matter who they are. The club are in a really difficult situation because I understand what they say with regards to wanting to protect their products and revenue.”
Peter Glover, managing director of CL3 design and marketing, said the Liverbird was an iconic image very closely associated with Liverpool.
He said: “It is the unique hallmark of so much in this city and serves as our standout marketing resource.
“For its trademark to be sold into private hands would cause untold problems for city businesses across a range of industry sectors.
“Plumbers, electricians, taxi firms, catering companies – all these kind of firms would be reluctant to use the Liverbird symbol on their marketing materials for fear of infringing trademark.
“This would lead to less exposure for the Liverbirds, which in turn would weaken Liverpool’s identity.
“In people’s minds, the symbol would go from being a cultural icon to a business asset, and this can only be a negative for the city.
“There is method to Liverpool FC’s argument and I appreciate they’re trying to protect their own position from counterfeiters.
“They’ve also said they have no intention of levying a charge, but a trademark is a long-term measure and things can quickly change.
“The Liverbirds belong to the city and we’d be left counting the cost if any single organisation – including LFC and the city council – were allowed to change that.”
One of the city’s design and marketing agencies warned that if the club got a trade mark it would spell bad news for hundreds of businesses in the city.
It comes after the Daily Post reported how LFC had applied for a trade mark of the famous bird which forms a key part of its club badge.
Liverpool City Council is taking legal advice on the matter with a view to lodging an objection with the UK Intellectual Property Office before the deadline for doing so expires on Saturday.
Liverpool FC claims it is only seeking to trade mark its own version of the Liverbird because the club is losing a “substantial amount of money” each year due to counterfeit merchandise. The club insists it would not try to prevent the council, business, charities or other bodies using the Liverbird logo.
David Worrall, senior solicitor with Liverpool’s Shipley Solicitors, last night warned the club that the version of the Liverbird it was seeking to trademark was quite generic.
“I would expect that if people do challenge it through the opposition process, the football club will face difficulties in registering this. It’s not cut and dry, they might get it if nobody opposes it. But I am sure there are plenty of people thinking about doing it.
“I think a lot of people feel that it belongs to the public and not a company, no matter who they are. The club are in a really difficult situation because I understand what they say with regards to wanting to protect their products and revenue.”
Peter Glover, managing director of CL3 design and marketing, said the Liverbird was an iconic image very closely associated with Liverpool.
He said: “It is the unique hallmark of so much in this city and serves as our standout marketing resource.
“For its trademark to be sold into private hands would cause untold problems for city businesses across a range of industry sectors.
“Plumbers, electricians, taxi firms, catering companies – all these kind of firms would be reluctant to use the Liverbird symbol on their marketing materials for fear of infringing trademark.
“This would lead to less exposure for the Liverbirds, which in turn would weaken Liverpool’s identity.
“In people’s minds, the symbol would go from being a cultural icon to a business asset, and this can only be a negative for the city.
“There is method to Liverpool FC’s argument and I appreciate they’re trying to protect their own position from counterfeiters.
“They’ve also said they have no intention of levying a charge, but a trademark is a long-term measure and things can quickly change.
“The Liverbirds belong to the city and we’d be left counting the cost if any single organisation – including LFC and the city council – were allowed to change that.”
No comments:
Post a Comment