The Royal Air Force (TM)

[c-bert]

I'm afraid this isn't anything new. A computer game manufacturer was recently unable to include certain WW2 American carrier bourne aircraft because a certain American aerospace company wanted a large sum for the rights to use their aircraft.

[Postman Plod]

Surely this is going to have the completely opposite effect to the one desired? Manufacturers currently using the logo will either switch to something else or stop making them (Airfix stop making RAF makred aircraft, or remove the decals completely say, Ben Sherman stop making target branded stuff, etc) meaning the logos are no longer in the public domain, other than on "official" merchendise.

Lets face it, the RAF aren't exactly good at marketing their own goods - I mean the RAF trainers for example.... Even then, the goods will only be available by mail order, or from a few museums. So how exactly is this increasing public awareness?

[Bluntend]

Recent recruitment campaigns have also been dire. The guy getting a splinter in the supermarket for example or the chap playing solitaire on his PC - laughable!

[MrBernoulli]

Good grief! These sodding wankers have got nothing better to do? Obviously not. I despair of idle desk-driving idiots who think up hare-brained bollocks over their endless cups of tea/coffee. They should be SHOT ....... every day for a fortnight!

[Jackonicko]

Great image booster. The roundel, squadron markings, etc. were once associated with professionalism, excellence, etc. Now many people's first reaction will be "grasping c**ts."

I hope kit and decal manufacturers tell the DPA to "go away."

[mrwickets]

Raf (tm)

I hope this is a wind up. That said, IMHO it could be the RAF getting its own back, as I understand that Ben Sherman successfully blocked our right to emblazon roundels on baseball caps and t-shirts recently. Couldn't swear to the accuracy of that, but some corporate comms dude told me that a few weeks ago. What a load of bolleux

[Gainesy]

Which, of the many variations of roundel, has been trade-marked? One of them? All of them? Hi-viz or low viz? Matt or gloss? What about the fin flash?

Whatever, this adoption of civvy huggyfluff crap by a supposedly military organisation makes me seeth. Tossers.

[g126]

Disgusting! Does this mean that unit produced merchandise will be banned as well? I recently had T-Shirts printed with the Roundel and with our unit badge. Should I be preparing myself for a law-suit? The world has gone mad.

I did hear of the RAF attempting to stop Ben Sherman/Lambretta etc. from using the Roundel many a year ago, but I thought that was unsuccessful. Anyone know any more?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

************ADVERTISEMENT*************

New:RAF SPREAD

Leaner than any other

Spreads more thinly than you could believe

Collect tokens from the first ten packs, and win a free recipe book from our chefs T Blair, G Brown, G "TCH" Hoon, J Reid and A Ingram

Check it out bro'! Is it coz we ain't got any money?

[g126]

Here we are...

http://www.patent.gov.uk/tm/legal/de...004/o01004.pdf

(Skip to the decision.)

The Air Force lost it's bid to preserve the roundel exclusively for the use of RAF merchandise in 2002. May be different for Airfix though if they are using it in context of the Air Force,

[BEagle]

Perhaps Pusser will put in a requisition for Royal Air Force™ 'Lean and Thin' Crab Paste....? I do hope so!

Has anyone ever met this Buckingham person? Is TMAC? He rather sounds it. If he wants to raise public awareness of the RAF, sorry, the RAF™ the solution is obvious - bloody well pay for a few more airshows with lots of noisy jets roaring past low and fast at warp snot. Not some silly logo-flogging marketing crap.

MoD Corporate Greed™ - You Invest in Our People....

[mrwickets]

Further to above, just did a quick bit of research - looks like RAF tried to copyright roundel in 2003/2004 but were opposed by Ben Sherman, amongst others. RAF told to shove it and had to pay some costs. Some great legaleeze - eg 'group of persons known as mods'. Can't do the clever link stuff, but transcript of findings at for those interested:

http://www.patent.gov.uk/tm/legal/de...004/o01004.pdf

Now lost the will to live ....

Wow - pprune did the fancy link stuff for me!
Damn - someone got in before me!

[BEagle]

"59. The opponent contends that the mark in suit, which it describes as the “target device”, has been used by numerous third parties in relation to clothing since the 1960s and in particular, has been closely associated with the style of dress worn by Mods, a group of individuals who from the 1960s became identified by their clothes consciousness, their fondness for motorised scooters and opposition to certain other groups."

Wonderful stuff. Perhaps the Mr Moolamkuzhiel Raghavan Viswanathan Nair, who explained in his witness statement, dated 1 April 2003, that he worked for the Ministry of Defence’s Intellectual Property Rights Group, simply didn't remember the 'Mods and Rockers' of the 1960s?

I do hope the journos are reading this thread! Morale and overstretch at an all-time low, exit rates burgeoning yet all the MoD worries about is trying to trademark the RAF, sorry, the RAF™ roundel.

[mystic_meg]

Has anyone ever met this Buckingham person?

.....sadly, yes.

Is TMAC?

....I refer my learned friend to my first answer.

chump

....I refer (etc, etc)

[airborne_artist]

Perhaps the RAF™ should be instructing Messrs. Sue, Grabbit and Run to seek a licencing fee from the RAAF, RCAF, RNZAF etc. who might be attempting to "pass off" as the RAF™ in their own countries, and may have been doing so for many years.

[RayDarr]

Raf Plc

Chaps, it's worse than you think. Every time one of our brave boys/girls takes to the sky, we must pay a "Royalty" for dareing to have our aircraft marked with the official logo. Not only that, but after each bomb is dropped on the enemy, we must also drop leaflets stating:
"This destruction is brought to you with the complements of blah blah blah, owners of Pokermon and all the other toys your children used to play with"
NB Ref Blah Blah etc. I just can't be asked to look back in the thread and see who these fools are.

Sounds like another stunning victory in the war against terrorism, and an opportunity for the leaders of "The Hoon Show" to make their way in civi street once they decide to get a propper job.

[Big Tudor]

Could be the way forward in future conflicts though. Can you imagine how powerful the RAF™ would be if they copyrighted air-to-air and ground-to-air weapons.
"Right chaps, if any of those nasty enemy chaps try to shoot you down just note their name, rank & country of origin and report them to the Office of Fair Trading!"

Could be onto a winner here chaps!

"All events, characters and names portrayed in this air raid are purely fictitious. Any resemblance to air raids current or past is purely coincidental and the RAF™ cannot be held liable for any likeness, whether actual or inferred."

[airborne_artist]

The RAF™ should also trademark the Battle of Britain and other significant UK plc air warfare events, and so be able to charge a licensing fee for BoB parades, for example, say a fiver a head

I think I'm right in saying that RAF™ CFS "invented" the basic flying training lessons etc., you know EofC ... so RAF™ should be charging a fee for every flying lesson conducted using RAF™ instructional methods.

[Well Travelled Nav]

Who is this Buckingham?

Well, it sounds awfully like an IOT Flight Commander I had back in 1994.

I recall that we were volunteered, as cheap labour, to sell tickets at the Finningley Airshow. As a reward, he allowed us to attend the Mess party on the proviso that we left the party at 9pm to return to IOT. Cheers. A nice chap who looks after and rewards his subordinates.


WTN

[ExGrunt]

I suspect I am going to be in a minority here, having read the rest of the thread.

But the position is:

Businesses are making money out of the RAF's insignia. The RAF has two choices:

1. Do nothing and let anyone make what they can on any old tat they can flog.

2. Get someone who knows something about licencing to make sure that people pay a contribution for use of the RAF's insignia to the RAF. ( I believe that the bulk of the cash goes to the RAF museum at Hendon).

So in the end which is better: something for the RAF or nothing for the RAF?

EG