allowed or not?

[Timexit17]

Noticed the LCGB 65th Anniversary logo (with the LCGB logo snipped off the bottom) on the bradford tat advert in Scootering magazine this month.

Is this logo authorised for this advertiser?
Or are they using it without permission?

Not being 'picky' but I just think a commercial venture should behave itself with other peoples 'property'.

[dave411]

Just get out and ride your Lammy

[Donnie]

Yeah, just ignore any copyright infringement, ignore the work put into the logo by hardworking people who likely weren't paid much in the first place, ignore the fact it's essentially stealing someone elses work for commercial gain (assuming it is the logo and it is used without permission in the advert)

[Timexit17]

Dave -I appreciate that some don't think this is a serious issue, dealing with copyright/licensing on an all too regular basis with my work it tends to annoy me a great deal when someones else's hard work is stolen as Donnie correctly says, and yes, I DO ride my Lambretta, thanks for caring.

The fact is that logo was made by a volunteer for the LCGBs benefit, it is the property of the LCGB, just as much as the clubs scooters are the clubs property and therefore owned by all of us members.
Would I be happy if someone outside of the LCGB was using a club bike for commercial gain and without permission? No I wouldn't and nor should you.
Feel free to be so laissez-faire about your own 'property' by all means.

I am guessing (until an official can tell us otherwise) that 'Bradford exchange' didn't even ask for permission to use the logo, let alone attempt to license it properly.
I am further guessing that their copy artist removed the LCGB logo from underneath the 65th picture/logo as they thought this might allow them to use the rest -it doesn't.

Obviously it's up to the committee what they do about it (if there is any issue?) but it's copyright misuse at least and could be construed as 'passing off' as they are using a recognised logo that might mislead consumers into believing the tat they are selling is officially endorsed by the LCGB, or they are working in partnership with the LCGB.

If it was my logo there'd be a 'cease & desist' letter on it's way along with a complaint to the ASA and possibly a letter to mortons media.

[johnnyXS]

Quite right....
I'm sure Dave meant the remark as a joke but
It never ceases to surprise me how 'easy going' folk are about other peoples property and rights and how outraged they become when it directly involves their own

[weeks]

As far as im aware the club did make a request some time ago for the removal of this art work from future advertisements ect.

I cant confirm for definite from memory if that was just to remove the LCGB logo or the full artwork, the former could have been viewed as some sort of endorsement which wasn't the case.

Ive not seen the advert so I don't know what has been printed, it maybe an old add or the club may have given permission. Before everyone gets excited il double check the current position and hopefully confirm.

Personally it would seem a little silly to me to use artwork that is a number of years out of date but then again do people who buy these items care !!

[weeks]

Noticed the LCGB 65th Anniversary logo (with the LCGB logo snipped off the bottom) on the bradford tat advert in Scootering magazine this month.

Is this logo authorised for this advertiser?
Or are they using it without permission?

Not being 'picky' but I just think a commercial venture should behave itself with other peoples 'property'.

Short answer is "Yes" they were authorised and "No they aren't" using without permission .................. Authorisation was given some time ago to the company in question to use agreed club designs as long as any LCGB logo was removed.

Not a personal fan of this sort of merchandise myself, even if in a small way they do sort-of promote Lambretta as a current relevant brand to those not as active as some LCGB members.
I do though support and understand the reasoning why permission was granted in this case, the club obviously work with past sponsors and possible future ones, all of which benefits the membership past present and hopefully future.

Cheers

[Timexit17]

Thanks Weeksy.

That's clarified that then, I see the argument that even tat 'promotes' Lambretta although it where the club draws the line on how tatty 'tat' must be before we don't think it supports but detracts.

I had nothing against this company or their tat (many of my own friends might wish to spend their money on such things for example) just somewhere in the recesses of my brain I remember it being discussed amongst LCGB members and thought it was not allowed.

Thanks again.

[dave411]

point taken