FMC Online (6 Viewers)

[BUSA]

Also you’ve only got to go Skegness or Blackpool or any major car boot/market to see ppl selling copies of clothing, perfume etc

 

---

[Nick]

Also you’ve only got to go Skegness or Blackpool or any major car boot/market to see ppl selling copies of clothing, perfume etc

Or you could just look online.

Just because somebody else is selling fake premier league kits does it mean the club are out of order for asking him not to?

I bought a domain name once that included the word Ugg, within 2 months I had an email telling me to remove it else I would be sued.

 

[BUSA]

I’m not saying it’s right but it’s odd that it’s taken the club a whole season to act on it. I think the club could have worked with him that’s all. I think the stuff he sells is arguably better quality than the club shop sells

 

[Nick]

I’m not saying it’s right but it’s odd that it’s taken the club a whole season to act on it. I think the club could have worked with him that’s all. I think the stuff he sells is arguably better quality than the club shop sells

How could they work with him when they have official partners they work with?

Don't you see the link with the new club shop partner signing?

 

[BUSA]

Would the club say anything if he removed the club badge, kit manufacturer logo and the sponsor off the shirts ? You can’t really claim copyright infringement on a shirt template

 

[BUSA]

How could they work with him when they have official partners they work with?

Don't you see the link with the new club shop partner signing?

Of course I’m 99% sure Hummel have played a role in this action against FMC and if they have anything about them they’ll see the potential of a retro shirt range for ccfc to make some money.

 

[BUSA]

There are plenty of free lance football websites selling ccfc related stuff - hallyink, the terrace, art of football to name just 3 besides FMC - are the club going after them as well ?

 

[Nick]

There are plenty of free lance football websites selling ccfc related stuff - hallyink, the terrace, art of football to name just 3 besides FMC - are the club going after them as well ?

Selling a print of shirts on a mug is a bit different to full on fake shirts though isn't it?

 

[Grendel]

I’m not saying it’s right but it’s odd that it’s taken the club a whole season to act on it. I think the club could have worked with him that’s all. I think the stuff he sells is arguably better quality than the club shop sells

Not really. jaguar used have loads of independent operators using approved logos. Sometimes it would take a few years to identify and shut down but rightly they were shut down

 

[Alkhen]

If somebody was selling fake adidas stuff online they would probably get more than asked to take it down wouldn't they?

He did a run of Adidas cov kits inspired by the Holland 88 kit

 

[BUSA]

It’s still using the Coventry city name to make money. We’ll agree to disagree on the matter. Hopefully FMC takes on board the club’s wishes and the new kit manufacturer provide a retro range at a sensible price for the fans

 

[BUSA]

Not really. jaguar used have loads of independent operators using approved logos. Sometimes it would take a few years to identify and shut down but rightly they were shut down

I believe he was in dialogue with the club before he started production

 

[Grendel]

I believe he was in dialogue with the club before he started production

Did he get a signed agreement to
Proceed?

 

[BUSA]

I don’t know ‍

 

[jordan210]

Sounds like he has asked about what he can and can't do

 

[chiefdave]

Plenty of other clubs who let ppl use their copyright to produce stuff - Exeter & Ipswich have deals with the terrace who do similar stuff to fmconline

The key words there are have deals. If it was properly licensed it wouldn't be an issue.

As great as these kits are, the ones I've purchased have been excellent quality, just because we like them and they're popular doesn't really make it any different to dodgy knock offs down the car boot sale.

 

[as13]

So does he sell stuff and pocket money that should be going to the club?

That's just what sisu do sell player's and pocket the money

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk

 

[Ricketts]

I bought a domain name once that included the word Ugg, within 2 months I had an email telling me to remove it else I would be sued.

Juggy.com?

 

[JimmyHillsbeard]

The key words there are have deals. If it was properly licensed it wouldn't be an issue.

As great as these kits are, the ones I've purchased have been excellent quality, just because we like them and they're popular doesn't really make it any different to dodgy knock offs down the car boot sale.

On the second point. I bought an egg timer shirt off FMC the quality, look and price of which is streets ahead of the licensed replica versions the club was selling a few years back. Would have liked the club to have arranged some sort of deal with FMC for replica-retros under licence but not surprised it has ended like this.

 

[luwalla]

Would the club say anything if he removed the club badge, kit manufacturer logo and the sponsor off the shirts ? You can’t really claim copyright infringement on a shirt template

If he did all that then I guess they wouldn’t have any cause too... but he would most likely not sell anything either!! People buy them because they are replicas with all of the above included

 

[Skyblueweeman]

That's just what sisu do sell player's and pocket the money

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk

Yes mate. That's exactly what they do......

 

[Fergusons_Beard]

A real shame as there is obviously a definite market out there for it.

Always thought why aren’t the club doing this but then the clubs decisions regarding kit and merchandise are and have been awful for ages.

Rather than commercial team shutting down people like FMC they should be looking at his operation as an indicator of future markets.

They could have engaged FMC to supply club ‘licenced’ retro kits-like others have said FMC stuff real quality!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[weecohawena]

Hummel will definitely be doing something similar so makes complete sense to shut him down.

 

[itsabuzzard]

I think there’s definitely some legal questions concerning reproducing shirts which feature currently extant sportswear brands like Umbro, Asics and Admiral - irrespective of the club logo situation. However in the case of Ribero that company went bust back in the early 90s (which is why both Norwich and Crystal Palace ended up wearing their existing Ribero kit, but with a new supplier label over the top - Mitre in Norwich’s case, and Nutmeg for Palace). This makes their situation a little more unclear: Norwich have already re-used a version of their Ribero kit pattern as part of a third kit made by Errea, and there’s also an officially-licensed reproduction of the 92-94 kit made by one of the main retro shirt companies (I thought it was Score Draw but apparently it’s someone else).

So just who owns the rights to that pattern? I’m not sure. Maybe it’s the club itself? Funnily enough I tracked down one of the old Ribero club directors a year or so back to ask about licensing the pattern and he told me that they (as in Ribero, apparently reborn) would be producing retro shirts in the next six months, citing Burnley as an example. I don’t think this ever happened though.

Complicating matters even more, it appears that the Chinese knock-off industry (which already makes a very healthy living from reproducing current modern day kits extremely faithfully for a fraction of the cost) has now started making reproductions of famous retro kits. These appear to be extremely accurate, so it makes it a lot harder to identify genuine older kits sold on eBay. I doubt they’d ever focus on Coventry, though, so maybe there’s still space for somebody like FMC provided there’s no trademarks being exploited, and they’re not direct copies of originals. I remember when I shared my fantasy kits on here a lot of people were concerned about the legal angle too, but provided you’re not exactly copying anyone it ought to be fine. Trouble is that means they’re probably less desirable too!

I think the "currently" in your first paragraph is superfluous.

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

 

[kg82]

Has it been confirmed it’s Hummel then? I just thought that was still a rumour.