Scooterotica

Nic wrote: Are you suggesting that the LCGB, which has always clearly stated that it was born out of BLOA, should have continued to organise occasional rallies in the BLOA name or brought out a magazine called BLOA in order to jump through an IPO hoop 10 or 20 years down the line?

Don’t be ridiculous.

I was merely speculating on what the IPO office might pay attention to. I believe I’m at liberty to do that if I wish....

Has anyone ever read "Gulliver's travels"?

hendy wrote:Has anyone ever read "Gulliver's travels"?

No but I have Animal farm with its unelected committee....

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

Nic wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:42 pm

drunkmunkey6969 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:34 pm

servetakid wrote:http://www.ilambretta.co.uk/forum/viewt ... f=9&t=9519

I thought this was worth posting for some balance.

Interestingly...the IPO website shows that the trademark application was made under category 41 (club services). So not sure if a mug or sticker to celebrate a defunct club is covered under that, and as such might not demonstrate a use of the name against the category applied for?

When was the last BLOA club rally or newsletter? That’s what would demonstrate use against a club category...I guess?

Are you suggesting that the LCGB, which has always clearly stated that it was born out of BLOA, should have continued to organise occasional rallies in the BLOA name or brought out a magazine called BLOA in order to jump through an IPO hoop 10 or 20 years down the line? I see you are very focussed on the the legal minutiae: why don't you try to engage with the point that Servetakid's actually trying to make, that the LCGB has always linked the BLOA name to its own 65-year history and that for someone to grab it is morally wrong?

Morally perhaps, but if Gavin is correct and the name was acquired legally, which at this point it would appear to be until proven otherwise, then you've been very remiss. Sharp practice or not you have rested on your laurels.

shocky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:14 pm

Looks like dinner with the inlaws.

Doom Patrol wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:14 pm
................................then you've been very remiss. Sharp practice or not you have rested on your laurels.

I think that is pretty unfair, if the LCGB was run by a professional management team then maybe, but as with thousands of clubs up and down the country, it is run by a bunch of enthusiastic volunteers in between holding down full time jobs and raising families. None of them will have any idea about protecting copyright, they are the victims of a bit of sharp practice, technically legal possibly but sneaky at best. To suggest it is the LCGB's fault because they didn't envisage someone nipping in and grabbing something is just plain daft.

There seems to be a serious lack of objectivity in some people's arguments

shocky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:14 pm No but I have Animal farm with its unelected committee....

We vote for the LCGB committee every year Steve.

corrado wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:57 am
We vote for the LCGB committee every year Steve.

And they do a brilliant job.

Nic wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:35 pm

Tim, it's quite obvious to anyone who knows you why you have "joined BLOA". You're someone who, to my personal knowledge, has held a personal grudge against the Lambretta Club for at least 10-12 years, possibly longer. I remember you coming to my house in the early Noughties and whinging on about the LCGB even then.

Which is why the real thing that motivates you in this whole BLOA debate is your long-standing, sour hatred of the LCGB.

In the course of your hatred, you've not even tried to engage with the argument I tried to put forward - that morally, the BLOA name is neither Gavin's to take - or yours to "join".

As for you being a judge of character - by your own admission you've neither met nor spoken to Gavin Frankland. Generally, that's considered fairly crucial when it comes to judging someone's character. Not for you, clearly.

Finally, what I find totally contemptible is how you are prepared to put any scootering principle in the bin as long as you can "stick it to" the LCGB. Pathetic.

Is it any surprise that I regard what you say to be laughable?

Nic more and more lies from your blinkered journalistic eyes......I joined BLOA early last year when it popped up on FB and there was no mention of the LCGB and I was not aware of any historical connection with BLOA and the LCGB. In fact I joined on the 30/4/2017 so your welcome to look back at the BLOA FB pages to see if I am correct. I thingk you will find no mention of the LCGB. My only grudge against the LCGB was down to the moderating of their open forum run by Weeks who lacked severely in people skills. I attended the Lincoln Euro rally and made a big effort to find him. I went up to him to chat through our differences and to shake his hand. He declined. I have a witness to this. I’v also gone on record in the past to say that the rally was superbly organised but just not my thing. This is why I organise every year a Gite in France with 4-6 good mates. I left the LCGB due to the moderation of the forum and Weeks is attitude. I was not asked to leave or was I expelled. Let’s be very clear Nic I have no hatred for the LCGB and mostly I see them doing a great job for the love in my life so stop spouting these lies!!! I have been in business for over 45 years dealing daily with the Public. I can generally tell from telephone conversations, emails, pm’s the sort of person I am dealing with. I use this skill when selling stuff on the net. How quickly people respond to messages etc. I’m usually right so a face to face meeting is not necessary. I’m also not naive. During my membership with BLOA it became obvious there was a dispute with the LCGB and this was explained by Gavin Franklin who I believe. Surely a meeting with him straight away by the LCGB would be the first course of action. I’ve been told this didn’t take place. As I said if proved wrong I’m happy to apologise, not something I can see you doing Nic. Your use of the words aimed at me “personal grievance” “sour hatred” “stick it to” are simply lies made up to suit you to discredit me. As was your trashing of Gavin Franklin. As a journalist I thought you only dealt in facts so stop telling f@@king lies and speculating about me and others as you clearly have got it well wrong and your bang out of order. Stick to facts!

coaster wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2018 12:28 am

Doom Patrol wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:14 pm
................................then you've been very remiss. Sharp practice or not you have rested on your laurels.

I think that is pretty unfair, if the LCGB was run by a professional management team then maybe, but as with thousands of clubs up and down the country, it is run by a bunch of enthusiastic volunteers in between holding down full time jobs and raising families. None of them will have any idea about protecting copyright, they are the victims of a bit of sharp practice, technically legal possibly but sneaky at best. To suggest it is the LCGB's fault because they didn't envisage someone nipping in and grabbing something is just plain daft.

There seems to be a serious lack of objectivity in some people's arguments

Hang on. We've heard a lot about protecting the clubs heritage and how it rested on a moral defence, so people seem pretty clued up on it now. Especially when it comes to starting legal action. Although, I wouldn't be overly enthusiastic if, as you say, none of them have any idea what they are doing. Sorry if that sounds unfair, but it is basically the gist of it.