jayEm Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 37 minutes ago, Teale's 'tache said: The detailing was already trademarked by the club long ago, all he did was put it over another design that was also already trademarked by the club, and then did a fancy render, so I don't think legally he'd be able to kick up much of a fuss. Yeah that does make sense. Sounds like he wouldn't mind at all anyway. Come on Chris, do the right thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvonVillain Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 It's fine. I would make changes. I no longer care. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talldarkandransome Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 10 hours ago, nick76 said: I’ve worked days on this and you don’t want to see it Take that silly star out and thats perfect 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daveburnside Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 On 09/01/2024 at 20:30, Jas10 said: That Bosko copied this and claimed its as his own, then the club copied Bosko and TMed it. Plot twist - Asten is Heck!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keener window-cleaner Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 I'm following this thread with great interest, but I'm still a bit confused. Do we have any reliable sources of what the new badge will look like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jas10 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 32 minutes ago, Daveburnside said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jas10 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 12 minutes ago, Keener window-cleaner said: I'm following this thread with great interest, but I'm still a bit confused. Do we have any reliable sources of what the new badge will look like? All we have to go off of are the trademarked designs… nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jas10 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 Bloody farce this is 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoony Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 5 hours ago, Woody1000 said: This is completely insane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalfTimePost Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 3 hours ago, Keener window-cleaner said: I'm following this thread with great interest, but I'm still a bit confused. Do we have any reliable sources of what the new badge will look like? Yes it's been trademarked. Twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalfTimePost Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 8 hours ago, Woody1000 said: What the actual **** is going on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 In fairness, that " Asten " account put the overlay on the lion way before Bosko Boots did his rendering, and the club trademarked the overlay graphic years ago? So essentially, the club own all the elements which go into the badge already, what grounds would that bloke have to kick up a fuss? No one asked him to do what he did lol. I'm starting to wonder if we're being " had " by multiple parties FFS . Just needs to be done now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tayls Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 Why is that a screenshot from a note on an iOS device? If they were posting something why not post it on the platform directly? Bit weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallisFrizz Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 2 hours ago, Tayls said: Why is that a screenshot from a note on an iOS device? If they were posting something why not post it on the platform directly? Bit weird. It’s not uncommon when people have a lot to say that they screenshot a note rather than do multiple short tweets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolta Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 6 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: In fairness, that " Asten " account put the overlay on the lion way before Bosko Boots did his rendering, and the club trademarked the overlay graphic years ago? So essentially, the club own all the elements which go into the badge already, what grounds would that bloke have to kick up a fuss? No one asked him to do what he did lol. I'm starting to wonder if we're being " had " by multiple parties FFS . Just needs to be done now. Is he kicking up a fuss? Isn't he just saying it's funny that the club seem to have gone from the drop shadow version to basically the version he did (or the other guy). As in, it's funny that they might literally have copied him/them. If the club are reading this CUT OUT THE 1874! It's such a pointless, random addition and it ruins the spacing. Arguably mack off the star too. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolta Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 15 hours ago, Muller Yogurt Long Sleever said: If the shield is locked in, Chris has completed Step 2. Please continue. In fairness, the last one is really nice. And weirdly, having said what I've just said, if the text is going to be at the bottom, I prefer the two versions of the crest with the 1874. Maybe I'm wrong about that. I think I like 2 and 3, and then 5. Maybe 2 and 3 are good! But the first one really is very shit looking now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 3 VT Supporter Share Posted February 3 28 minutes ago, Rolta said: In fairness, the last one is really nice. And weirdly, having said what I've just said, if the text is going to be at the bottom, I prefer the two versions of the crest with the 1874. Maybe I'm wrong about that. I think I like 2 and 3, and then 5. Maybe 2 and 3 are good! But the first one really is very shit looking now. The last one is nice but the neon blue is horrible 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teale's 'tache Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 21 minutes ago, Rolta said: Is he kicking up a fuss? Isn't he just saying it's funny that the club seem to have gone from the drop shadow version to basically the version he did (or the other guy). As in, it's funny that they might literally have copied him/them. If the club are reading this CUT OUT THE 1874! It's such a pointless, random addition and it ruins the spacing. Arguably mack off the star too. He's not kicking up a fuss, but some were asking if he'd have grounds to do so, he doesn't. It is very strange though, that the club have trademarked the design with the extra detailing, because I'm not sure they needed to. They already had all of the components that make it up trademarked and I don't think it's enough of a deviation to really warrant the extra trademark, but full disclosure I'm no expert on trademarking. Personally, I think the detailing causes as many issues as it solves. It looks really nice in the render, and it looks slightly better than the non-detailed version at large-ish sizes, but at smaller sizes it looks a real mess. There are still fundamental issues with the design, no amount of extra detail is going to fix that. I'm not really sure what is going on now, @OutByEaster? said the club is speaking with the FA and I've no idea how long that process will last or has been going on, but I'd be surprised if the detailed version is what has resulted from those talks. Possibly they've seen the render and thought it looks nice, thought maybe we can use that somewhere, or someone else might use it somewhere, lets trademark it just in case. The whole situation is a complete mess and the communication on the matter has been beyond poor, it might all be worth it if we got a great crest/brand at the end of it, but from what I've seen so far that's going to be far from the case. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolta Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 42 minutes ago, Teale's 'tache said: He's not kicking up a fuss, but some were asking if he'd have grounds to do so, he doesn't. It is very strange though, that the club have trademarked the design with the extra detailing, because I'm not sure they needed to. They already had all of the components that make it up trademarked and I don't think it's enough of a deviation to really warrant the extra trademark, but full disclosure I'm no expert on trademarking. Personally, I think the detailing causes as many issues as it solves. It looks really nice in the render, and it looks slightly better than the non-detailed version at large-ish sizes, but at smaller sizes it looks a real mess. There are still fundamental issues with the design, no amount of extra detail is going to fix that. I'm not really sure what is going on now, @OutByEaster? said the club is speaking with the FA and I've no idea how long that process will last or has been going on, but I'd be surprised if the detailed version is what has resulted from those talks. Possibly they've seen the render and thought it looks nice, thought maybe we can use that somewhere, or someone else might use it somewhere, lets trademark it just in case. The whole situation is a complete mess and the communication on the matter has been beyond poor, it might all be worth it if we got a great crest/brand at the end of it, but from what I've seen so far that's going to be far from the case. I kind of feel people jump on this stuff too much. Lots of stuff happens behind closed doors all the time. I get it there are rules about fan consultation, but whatevs. I don't think the detailing on our potential badge is any worse than any other badge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMAICAN-VILLAN Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 1 hour ago, Rolta said: In fairness, the last one is really nice. And weirdly, having said what I've just said, if the text is going to be at the bottom, I prefer the two versions of the crest with the 1874. Maybe I'm wrong about that. I think I like 2 and 3, and then 5. Maybe 2 and 3 are good! But the first one really is very shit looking now. I think the 1874 at the bottom works on number 3, as you've indicated, because it's not white as well. That's my thinking, especially on the pale blue, I don't like the star and 1874 in white Which is why I suggested either removing them altogether or altering colour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts