GPWizard F1 Forum
F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: Andy B on June 16, 2018, 10:32:40 PM
-
After Liberty brought in the weird logo dumping the iconic F1 logo 3M are now taking legal action so good luck to them lets have our logo back.
https://www.planetf1.com/news/stationary-brand-3m-opposes-f1-logo/
-
Although this all went quiet for a while, I was sure it wouldn't go away. There are different angles to the argument, but from what I believe, the particular 3M product line in question, registered their logo earlier than Liberty Media's new F1 logo.
Sure this will be sorted out, but I would personally find it funny if Liberty Media have a battle on their hands!!!
Best Regards,
Cal :)
-
Maybe next time they'll due a little more research into a new logo.
-
I assume Liberty got a design company to do the logo. These logos are so near identical that whilst obviously Liberty are being sued by 3M, ultimately Liberty will be wanting those costs back from their design company. This company looks incompetent if they didn't notice 3Ms logo first. Alternatively, maybe they are the same design company as the one used by 3M and they figured they would just pocket the cash twice, for one bit of work...
-
If Liberty stayed out of clothing then there would be little chance of 3M challenging as similar styles can be used for different industries without compromising the trade mark rules.
I think 3M have been biding there time and until Liberty started to ramp up logo emblazoned clothing sales had no decent prospect of challenging the supposed interloper.
Before blaming the design studio we'd need to see the brief issued by liberty, if it never contained a mention of clothing then whoever put forward the logo would have felt safe it fell within trade mark rules.
There are quite a lot of different categories in the rules that trade marks can be registered under, 45 to be more precise, and Liberty have applied in 26 of them including clothing.
When anyone applies under a different category, using words or symbols similar to another original design, unless it is for identical or related goods and/or services it is usually assumed that no 'passing off' is possible - no competition between the mark holders so both can hold similar marks.
Clearly 3M now feel a challenge could succeed, however since their mark is in the category of therapeutic clothing it's possible but not certain their challenge will succeed.
-
Liberty are definitely planning clothing - they trialled three new items (a hat and 2 T-shirts) in a fan survey last week.
-
The 3M logo Futuro, like John said, is a brand of therepuetic support clothing, for example elbow braces, compression socks, knee braces, that sort of thing. It's not as if there is a huge line of clothing that they are protecting - the logo isn't even prominent on the products, just a little label and probably on the packaging. Most of the braces would even be doctor recommended or prescribed. I honestly believe 3M is suing Liberty on little more than a lark. It's just a bonus for their legal team to pull in a few million settlement for writing a letter.
Liberty will settle and all will be good again in copyright land.
-
The 3M logo Futuro, like John said, is a brand of therepuetic support clothing, for example elbow braces, compression socks, knee braces, that sort of thing. It's not as if there is a huge line of clothing that they are protecting - the logo isn't even prominent on the products, just a little label and probably on the packaging. Most of the braces would even be doctor recommended or prescribed. I honestly believe 3M is suing Liberty on little more than a lark. It's just a bonus for their legal team to pull in a few million settlement for writing a letter.
Liberty will settle and all will be good again in copyright land.
The line between therapeutic and safety gear could be a little blurry. I don't know if, for example, the HANS is F1 branded or not.
-
F1 has a general copyright for trademarks covering clothing in general. It doesn't distinguish between "safety" and "regular". Had they been more careful in that definition, there would have been no suit possible.
HANS would not have F1 branding, simply because it is FIA-supplied and therefore has FIA branding instead. What would have F1 branding and be safety-related is the overalls the FOM TV crews wear, their helmets, balaclavas and racing underwear (some of which could be confused with things like the abdominal support). However, I think it is the overreaching copyright claim FOM made, rather than the range of attire that actually carries the logo, which will cause the problem for Liberty.