LCGB AGM ref BLOA

[timexit17]

I believe I may have noted the relevant legal position of this earlier?
Copyright exists for a period after death -it's 70 years for published works and may well be similar for imagery also.
If the rights of the logos were passed to the LCGB (which the paperwork suggests they were) then copyright still exists.

[mick1]

GT -the entire article from jetset was reproduced by Nic on page 4 of this thread.

just had a quick scan of the hand written stuff and that says reserved not applied there's a difference i think.By what i only quickly looked at there's no copyright applied only reserved is there any documentation of it being actually applied?

My point being.....there is some paper work that the LCGB have and have been prepared to show (there may be more ?) but there has been nothing shown by GF...............nor has he replied to the YES/NO question put to him several times by another poster.

[GTFOMWSC]

I believe I may have noted the relevant legal position of this earlier?
Copyright exists for a period after death -it's 70 years for published works and may well be similar for imagery also.
If the rights of the logos were passed to the LCGB (which the paperwork suggests they were) then copyright still exists.

i understand what your saying and your right that is IF it was applied for and not just reserved,if it was only reserved there is no copyright so none of that would apply even if in writing he'd given it to them.Like you say though there may be other documents that they have inc the actually copyright document which they would need.At this point though Gavin can just stay quiet he doesn't have to produce or answer anything to anyone i'm afraid and it's totally upto him to do that.It might help his case if he did but that's his choice.

[nastro azzurro]

I’m getting a bit confused now.
I thought GF had applied for trademark?
Breach of copyright is something else is it not ? ( I don’t know am just assuming )
I also thought copyright reverted to next of kin after death and then lasted for 70 years.
If this is the case then MK’s next of kin hold this don’t they?
Patience is needed until the IPO ruling.
Personally I thought it was a great idea putting BLOA back into use along with the opportunity to maybe experience something different.
But if all this animosity and infighting is the outcome of this I think BLOA is best consigned to the annals of Lambretta history.

[wintermod65]

i think its fair to say that many of us posting have cherry picked or scanned info from various sources regarding to legal positions. at least nobody has declared they are a solicitor/ barrister or IP / copyright/trademark expert .

according to the documents printed by the LCGB mike kerslakes solicitor advised him with regards to copyright i would imagine this would have reflected the law as applicable at the time, whether there have been changes in the intervening years that might affect any hearing or further action remains to be seen .


i dont think anyone has a problem with what mr frankland was trying to achieve its just the method he choose to bring his ideas into fruition , morale of tale be original .

ok let hypothesise then

Mr frankland wins the hearing and can use the BLOA name and logos , what then LCGB trademark remaining former names and logos to prevent further loss by others seeking to cash in on its history .

what in financial terms does this cost to both sides ?
what does it cost in terms of the bad feeling towards BLOA generated by this saga. the cost to the LCGB will be minimal in this respect as the "haters " will still hate them no matter what.

flip side LCGB win , does BLOA side have funds to cover the action to give to those with no idea an example to getting a solicitor to write a kent based scooter dealer a letter remanding the return of my scooter after i pulled the plug on the work they were doing was over £200 plus over £100 initial meeting.
i would imgine this is far more complicated.
how many on the Facebook BLOA are paying members as the money you've put in could go very quickly on legal costs .then where doe that leave your organisation.
The LCGB will no doubt win as many members as it looses over the issue . and i would imagine if this thread is anything to go by the grudges that begin here will be repeated over some other controversy in the future.
also what will be the fallout in terms of the BSRA unless those clubs involved support the LCGB will they LCGB pull out. theres a hell of a lot more at stake than just a name, some are obviously aware of this and that why it arouses such passion .

after its all over what then will people be able to shake hands , metaphorically speaking an say "fairdos best side won "
lets hope so for continue interest in lambretta scooter riding sake

[Donnie]

“None of your comments had a bearing on the central point that the LCGB has been making, which is that Gavin Frankland, with your support and that of other individuals, has taken something that does not belong to him”

This implies that i/we have helped him please clarify?

f@@k me, it's always about you vicTimbo.

[Donnie]

I have another question it is being said quite a few times now that Mike Karslake copyrighted the designs and name if this is correct then how come Gavin was able to obtain it?.Surely if it was actually done and not just verbally given then he couldn't of got it.He could only of got it if it hadn't been,it wouldn't matter if it was a verbal or even written on a piece of paper if it wasn't actually registered it wouldn't of been copyrighted.I'm sure someone has said they actually saw the copyright can that person clarify that it was a copyright certificate.It seems very odd that if it's copyrighted then somebody else can obtain the name and designs.

Sigh,,,, you don't have to register copyright, it's implicit. Therefore he has tried to steal the history of the LCGB/BLOA by registering the name but has infringed copyright too through using the designs.

[Burnside]

I believe I may have noted the relevant legal position of this earlier?
Copyright exists for a period after death -it's 70 years for published works and may well be similar for imagery also.
If the rights of the logos were passed to the LCGB (which the paperwork suggests they were) then copyright still exists.

Correct, copyright, including imagery, last for 70 years after death, so even if the trademark has expired and can be taken by a new party, they cannot use copyrighted imagery, logos, etc.

So very interesting how Gavin Frankland accuses LCGB of bullying by stopping other vendors from selling BLOA merchandise, despite this being at the succinct request of the copyright owner, but blocks LCGB from selling BLOA merchandise on eBay...when they are actually legally entitled to do so but he isn't.

[GTFOMWSC]

I believe I may have noted the relevant legal position of this earlier?
Copyright exists for a period after death -it's 70 years for published works and may well be similar for imagery also.
If the rights of the logos were passed to the LCGB (which the paperwork suggests they were) then copyright still exists.

Correct, copyright, including imagery, last for 70 years after death, so even if the trademark has expired and can be taken by a new party, they cannot use copyrighted imagery, logos, etc.

So very interesting how Gavin Frankland accuses LCGB of bullying by stopping other vendors from selling BLOA merchandise, despite this being at the succinct request of the copyright owner, but blocks LCGB from selling BLOA merchandise on eBay...when they are actually legally entitled to do so but he isn't.

yes IF the copyright was actually done and not reserved if it wasn't and only reserved then they do not have copyright the scanned doc only shows reserved not copyright so you cannot pass something down or hold for 70 years if you never copyrighted in the first place.I will say again RESERVED is not copyrighted.I'll assume that LCGB do have the actual copyright but the scans do not show this.

[wintermod65]

I believe I may have noted the relevant legal position of this earlier?
Copyright exists for a period after death -it's 70 years for published works and may well be similar for imagery also.
If the rights of the logos were passed to the LCGB (which the paperwork suggests they were) then copyright still exists.

Correct, copyright, including imagery, last for 70 years after death, so even if the trademark has expired and can be taken by a new party, they cannot use copyrighted imagery, logos, etc.

So very interesting how Gavin Frankland accuses LCGB of bullying by stopping other vendors from selling BLOA merchandise, despite this being at the succinct request of the copyright owner, but blocks LCGB from selling BLOA merchandise on eBay...when they are actually legally entitled to do so but he isn't.

thats one for EBay customer services to answer as mr frankland has only applied for name trademark, its under objection so the trademark is not classed as registered . well thats as it stands on the IPO website . so what his rights to get EBAY to remove items are im not sure i remain to be enlightened on that one .