Mike Ashley starts legal battle over Rangers name, trademarks, crests and badges

[compo 7,039]

Its going to be costly to the club in legal fees

[gisabeer 409]

Cant help thinking that liewell and Ashley are mates.

[boabie 230]

Its going to be costly to the club in legal fees

 

Rangers have already stated they'd begin their own legal action against SD and others.

I'd suspect Ashley has started this one as a side show to ours.

[RANGERRAB 3,664]

I just hope our board have got sound legal advice for all of this

[der Berliner 3,744]

Its going to be costly to the club in legal fees

 

Which is probably the main reason why Ashley is doing this.

[pete 2,499]

I just hope our board have got sound legal advice for all of this

 

I worry it would have been very stupid of SD to sign a contract without tying in the use of the badge. I even worry that Rangers signing to give the contract to SD makes an unwritten agreement that they have use of the tradmarks. I can only see us winning if there is a get-out somewhere that says something like" Rangers reserve the right over trademarks at all times"

[alexscottislegend 2,320]

Direct action needed in his stores

 

Surely we can at least boycott Sports Direct. Organise a picket outside the stores if we think a large number of Rangers supporters are going to go. Get out the message that no Rangers supporter should buy anything from them.

[craig 5,199]

My 12 year old flat out refuses to go into Sports Direct. He was even appalled some of his boarding school mates went in there the other week !

[Uilleam 5,934]

I worry it would have been very stupid of SD to sign a contract without tying in the use of the badge. I even worry that Rangers signing to give the contract to SD makes an unwritten agreement that they have use of the tradmarks. I can only see us winning if there is a get-out somewhere that says something like" Rangers reserve the right over trademarks at all times"

 

I would be inclined to argue that the contract is so favourable to one party, and so prejudicial to the other, that anything assumed, or tacit, or understood, which in the normal run of events might be taken as contractual, may not be so considered. The arrangement is so slanted towards SD, that, any reasonable person would assume it could not, and was not intended to cover such matters as were not clearly specified within the contract, and that Rangers has no obligation towards SD in regard to them.

[calscot 0]

My 12 year old flat out refuses to go into Sports Direct. He was even appalled some of his boarding school mates went in there the other week !

 

He sounds very savvy and mature.