Mike Ashley starts legal battle over Rangers name, trademarks, crests and badges

[craig 5,195]

He sounds very savvy and mature.

 

I thought he was before but boarding school has been an absolute revelation for him Cal. I never wanted him to go but he was adamant he wanted to go back to U.K. For boarding school. Best decision he, and we, ever made. His maturity for a 12 yr old is excellent.

 

It's funny because I was that parent who always got him Rangers tops for future keepsakes.... but as soon as he found out Ashley was screwing us he himself didn't want any Rangers gear - and was absolutely delighted with the Lionbrand "away" top when I got him it last month.

Edited November 4, 2016 by craig

[trueblue 64 53]

I worry it would have been very stupid of SD to sign a contract without tying in the use of the badge. I even worry that Rangers signing to give the contract to SD makes an unwritten agreement that they have use of the tradmarks. I can only see us winning if there is a get-out somewhere that says something like" Rangers reserve the right over trademarks at all times"

 

The trademarks were given as security for the 5M loan from SD, and returned to us when we repaid it. IIRC.

[boabie 230]

I worry it would have been very stupid of SD to sign a contract without tying in the use of the badge. I even worry that Rangers signing to give the contract to SD makes an unwritten agreement that they have use of the tradmarks. I can only see us winning if there is a get-out somewhere that says something like" Rangers reserve the right over trademarks at all times"

 

Without being an expert in any way in all of this, a couple of things spring to mind -

Rangers [Green] sign up with S.D.

Green is running out of money so signs over trademark rights, etc for a £5 million loan.

King & Co pay back the £5 million so the rights revert to Rangers.

There is a fall out between Rangers and SD.

 

The initial deal is still there but maybe Rangers are telling SD and Puma that they can produce and sell our strips but, unless the contract is renegotiated, it will be without our badges, etc ? SD and Puma obviously disagree.

What gets me is where Ashley can think he still owns the trademarks.

My hope rests on Rangers taking them to court in an attempt to prove that Green was not acting on behalf of any shareholders other than himself.

 

The above could be complete rubbish btw.

[gaspard 562]

I worry it would have been very stupid of SD to sign a contract without tying in the use of the badge. I even worry that Rangers signing to give the contract to SD makes an unwritten agreement that they have use of the tradmarks. I can only see us winning if there is a get-out somewhere that says something like" Rangers reserve the right over trademarks at all times"

 

Yup and if there was a "get out" surely it would have been acted on by now.

The loan repayments that re-secured our IP was for me very positive and at the time I had high hopes it would lead to moves that could in some way either offer an alternative to SD or be the lever to renegotiate with them.

Alas nothing has changed and doesn't seem likely to any time soon. That's despite DK making rash prognostics months ago that a kit resolution was weeks away prompting speculation of deals with alternative kit suppliers.

The whole thing has been handled poorly IMO, though in their defence it's difficult without the full facts to judge too harshly, that said DK should have kept his council regarding kits and more effort should have been made to keep the kit supplier on-side , working with the club rather than creating another commercial partner in dispute.

 

The RR SD JV structure is without doubt one of the major stumbling blocks, what with the A and B shares allocation and I initially though there would have been a legal recourse to nullify the contract based on L&L's conflict of interests - however too much time has passed and looks like this avenue has been deemed non viable.

 

Goodness knows how much legal costs we have accumulated to date trying to resolve but there comes a time when we may just have to say there's nothing more we can do.

Good luck to those who advocate demos, boycotts and singing songs about Mike whilst well intentioned I don't think they will make one jot of difference to the retail relationship.

Frustrating I know but he's simply too big, wealthy and diverse in his interests for anyting we do to influence his stance.

 

Purely from a "devils advocate" position I will ask this though - if the club were to admit that every avenue had been exhausted and we were in fact tied to the contract until it expired, would it not be better to then start buying club merchandise again, ensuring at least some revenue from retail rather than the little or nothing we currently receive due to a combo of bad deal and boycott ?

 

Tin hat on

Edited November 4, 2016 by gaspard

[Darthter 542]

Is this dispute not over RFC removing Rangers Retail's use of the logos etc???

 

If Rangers Retail are not allowed to use the badge etc, they then can't produce OFFICIAL club merchandise. Puma used the reasoning that they had fulfilled an order from RR while they had the right to produce merchandise, and therefore were legally able to sell the strips. SD & other retailers are getting their stock direct from Puma rather than RR.....

[gaspard 562]

Is this dispute not over RFC removing Rangers Retail's use of the logos etc???

 

If Rangers Retail are not allowed to use the badge etc, they then can't produce OFFICIAL club merchandise. Puma used the reasoning that they had fulfilled an order from RR while they had the right to produce merchandise, and therefore were legally able to sell the strips. SD & other retailers are getting their stock direct from Puma rather than RR.....

 

maybe so regarding strips, but what about the pencils, hats, air fresheners, mugs etc etc that SD sell all RFC crest branded?

[boabie 230]

 

Purely from a "devils advocate" position I will ask this though - if the club were to admit that every avenue had been exhausted and we were in fact tied to the contract until it expired, would it not be better to then start buying club merchandise again, ensuring at least some revenue from retail rather than the little or nothing we currently receive due to a combo of bad deal and boycott ?

 

 

No. Sorry mate, but I won't be giving Ashley one brown cent.

King and Co supposedly have enough money between them to keep us going. If they haven't, they should move out.

[Darthter 542]

maybe so regarding strips, but what about the pencils, hats, air fresheners, mugs etc etc that SD sell all RFC crest branded?

 

I would assume that they will be old stock. Rangers Retail are unable to produce ANYTHING with official club references.

[gaspard 562]

I would assume that they will be old stock. Rangers Retail are unable to produce ANYTHING with official club references.

 

that's interesting Darthter, new one on me must confess.

so you are saying that under the terms of the contract Rangers Retail can sell RFC branded goods but cannot produce RFC branded goods.

 

Can you tell me where you sourced this please I would be interested to research further.

[boabie 230]

that's interesting Darthter, new one on me must confess.

so you are saying that under the terms of the contract Rangers Retail can sell RFC branded goods but cannot produce RFC branded goods.

 

Can you tell me where you sourced this please I would be interested to research further.

 

My understanding was that Rangers have cut out Rangers Retail completely. Not only can RR not produce branded goods, they can't even sell them.