Scooterotica

Still, at least being accused of 'not being able to read' is better than being accused in public of being 'a paedo' as you did the last time someone openly criticised you on your secret squirrel BLOAC facebook group.

You sound very confused, the person in question was quite rightly accused of what I said, are you friends with the accused?. My facts are in New Jetset magazine as quoted and other publications as mentioned. Take some time to educate yourself and maybe stop trying to be cleaver, you are not 10 years old so try and stop acting like one.

Gavin J Frankland wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:17 pm You sound very confused, the person in question was quite rightly accused of what I said, are you friends with the accused?. My facts are in New Jetset magazine as quoted and other publications as mentioned. Take some time to educate yourself and maybe stop trying to be cleaver, you are not 10 years old so try and stop acting like one.

What an actually nasty utterly distasteful person you are revealing yourself to be.

Gavin, you are the only one being very obviously revealed as childish, I am surprised you, or anyone else think otherwise.
You are clearly 'losing it', now you're being called out.

I am not 'cleaver' not any other cutting implement, axe, hatchet or knife.

The non-facts you have tried to peddle to all & sundry were:

That you 'owned' the trademark 'British Lambretta Owners Association'
INCORRECT
You have applied for trademark status on 23/12/16 and this has been opposed hence the trademark is in limbo marked as opposed, it is not granted and it is not yours currently or anyone elses.

Anyone who is interested can see it here:
https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/
It's registration number is UK00003203938, it is shown as opposed.

That you had the copyright for images associated with and the name 'British Lambretta Owners Association'
INCORRECT
You have lodged an image/images and the name with a private (NOT government/NOT official) company who offer a paid for service to keep a record that you are using said images/name from such & such a date.

It is entirely meaningless, as you cannot officially register a copyright.
The private company you have paid to keep your 'registration' with are merely offering a service to record/register your use, nothing more - and your certificate isn't worth the paper it's printed on if any person or organisation can prove they have used this mark/image/images before your registration date.
If anyone would like to register such a copyright with me, I will do it for you for 50% of the price anyone else offers please PM me.
For those who'd like to buy some magic beans I have those too, they're marked Heinz but don't worry about that -both just as valid as 'the uk copyright service' and their certificates.

Why continue with this nonsense?
Everyone on this forum and in the wider scootering community (that was interested) had thought the compromise of you using the BLOAC name was either acceptable or at least not as clear cut as the BLOA name/imagery.
It had then started to cool down and those who wanted to sit on the fence could do so without being worried too much.

Dan Clares decision to publish an article in this months scootering could be construed in different ways although many would have seen it as fairly unbiased (personally Stu Owens input was fairly vanilla bu the editorial comment certainly wasn't in my own view), I thought and still think it was unwise to publish such an article when the matter 'should' have been done & dusted.

You clearly then took this as a green light to re-start the issue.

You, no-one else. You.

Anyone who took him seriously must surely have wised up by now.

Special X150 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:48 pm Anyone who took him seriously must surely have wised up by now.

not a chance......

Gavin J Frankland wrote: ↑Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:17 pm You sound very confused, the person in question was quite rightly accused of what I said, are you friends with the accused?.

Oh so you have proof that he's a paedophile then?

Where is it?

Have you reported it to the police?

If so, when?

If not, why?

I think there's a problem with the term "the accused” as well - it implies that there's some legal process or charges involved, rather than simple unsubstantiated allegations.

That could be libel.

Maybe it's time for the moderators to lock this thread down as potential evidence?

FFS

Wondering if the BLOA/C certificates are even valid, there's no mention of any version of the club's names on the official government list of approved owners clubs updated August 2018.