Scooterotica

Wooops, I think I've dropped a clanger. LCGB think I'm Gavin franklin.

Gav BLOA wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:44 pm Wooops, I think I've dropped a clanger. LCGB think I'm Gavin franklin.

Is it possible that someone has registered copyright on your real name?

Scooterdude wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:46 am Multi page scathing report by the LCGB in this months Jetset, all seems to be going just a little to far now.

Agree, just read mine and couldn't believe how desperate it all sounded. Pathetic waste of pages.

One interesting thing is that in the report the LCGB repeatedly inserted comments, quotes and printed documents from Mike Karslake, which repeatedly stated all copyright to BLOA remained his and LCGB just had exclusive rights. Therefore surely the ONLY persons legally entitled to challenge any copyright infringements today (if there are any) is Karslakes next of kin? Effectively, the printed quotes from Karslake show the LCGB to be nothing more than an authorised licensee. So not legally their position to challenge the copyright status...only his, or his next of kin?

Not what I read in the Jetset I got, but the LCGB haters are slowly crawling out.

Read most of it too, the LCGB mean business for sure, they're not going to let this go. I've tried to decipher IP rights and it's not totally clear how this will go, however the LCGB have a raft of supporting evidence and it doesn't look good for the BLOA. LCGB could recover all their costs and so LCGB members worried about spending thousands on legal action may be reassured by that, especially if the LCGB push for full recompense, which I'm sure the members worried about the expense would expect them to do.

On the other hand the person making the alleged infringement could lose thousands in costs, it's a serious situation. Okay, the Sywell T-shirts may become a rare collectors item one day but may remind us that if we do something similar the consequences are financially frightening.

I suppose that's what can happen if you 'poke the bear'.

Well, if they do get their way and crush the BLOA then I hope they are pleased with themselves. Right or wrong there aren't going to be any winners in this. I think there is going to leave a nasty taste in a lot of people's mouths.

Doom Patrol wrote: ↑Sun Mar 11, 2018 2:01 pm Well, if they do get their way and crush the BLOA then I hope they are pleased with themselves. Right or wrong there aren't going to be any winners in this. I think there is going to leave a nasty taste in a lot of people's mouths.

Crush what???? As far as I can see, the only thing the LCGB are doing is protecting the BLOA name. They aren't trying to prevent another club ( actually a Ltd company) being set up so all that has to happen here is Gavin Frankland needs to withdraw from the use of the BLOA name and use a little imagination to come up with an original name for his business. Everybody happy then surely?

That might be all that needs to happen. But I doubt it will be quite as straight forward as that. I haven't got my Jet Set in the post yet, so I can't comment on the tone of the article. But I get the feeling they want their pound of flesh.

Trademarks last 10 years from registration and if not renewed are then no longer protected.
Copyright lasts until the death of the person and thereafter for 70 years.
So this hinges on whether it’s contravening trademark or copyright law does it not?
I don’t know as I’am not an expert but there are many legal experts that specialise in this field and I’m sure the concerned parties will engage legal experts that actually specialise in the law regarding this.
Anyway I’ve applied to join BLOA as I like the cut of their jib!