| This is pretty poor from Man U on 22:34 - Feb 27 with 1053 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
In my opinion, they (the couple doing the drawings) should continue.
If the club decide to push it to prosecution, it would be a massive own goal and they should argue that they have not used any of the actual names or images.
Ultimately, were they to lose the case, the potential damages would be tiny from the club's perspective and the couple would be unable to pay. The publicity for them could be a real positive for them.
At the very least they should seek free legal advice on how to ensure they can continue without infringing any actual copyrights. I can't see how you can copyright image so no one can caricature it without permission. Trump would have a field day if it were possible. |  |
|  |
| This is pretty poor from Man U on 06:40 - Feb 28 with 934 views | m14_blue |
Football has eaten itself |  | | |
| This is pretty poor from Man U on 07:43 - Feb 28 with 834 views | chicoazul |
| This is pretty poor from Man U on 06:40 - Feb 28 by m14_blue |
Football has eaten itself |
Not really. The pair of them are pretty thick to think they can get away with imitating the trademark of one of the biggest brands in the world even if it is for "charideee" |  |
| |
| This is pretty poor from Man U on 11:41 - Feb 28 with 696 views | Championship |
Don't legal cases set precedents? Is this heavy handed approach simply to stop future copyright infringers referring back to this case?
Might be completely wrong, just a theory. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
