Sky Sports' Johnny Phillips: Copyright claims in football reaching new lows

Trademarks, brands, logos, marketing, merchandising, consumers, commercialism and other such words provide the context for this.

Liverpool want to claim the word ‘Liverpool’ as their intellectual property when used in the domain of football.

The club reasons that by doing so they can prevent unofficial merchandise and counterfeit products entering the market place, protecting supporters who might buy the unlicensed goods. On one level it is a fair claim.

Opposition has been strong, though. The club know this, too, with chief executive Peter Moore appearing on local radio to defend Liverpool’s position.

“Right now we are under attack from large-scale manufacturing which is alluding to official Liverpool FC merchandise,” he told Radio Merseyside. “This is not an attack on local football and local vendors.”

As a club, Liverpool already has a wide range of trademarks protecting its identity. The idea that they can take ownership of the word Liverpool – even in a football sense – does not sit well with many.

Liverpool is, first and foremost a city, and the name should always refer to that ahead of any privately run business or club.

There are at least three other football clubs in Liverpool who would be affected by this trademark application. AFC Liverpool, City of Liverpool FC and South Liverpool will find themselves falling foul of Liverpool’s trademark if the application is granted. Surely they are just as entitled to use the name Liverpool in a football sense? The name Liverpool belongs to all the inhabitants of the city.

Moore has moved to allay the fears of other clubs, stating that local clubs using the name Liverpool “have nothing to fear whatsoever”.

That might be the case now, but there will come a time in the future when Liverpool will have different owners who will have the power of the trademark if it is granted. Moore cannot protect local clubs from any future action.

Liverpool supporters’ group Spirit of Shankly are dead against the application.

“SOS strongly oppose the blatant monetisation of our football heritage. The name is not (Liverpool owners) Fenway Sports Group’s to own, it is the name of our city, is it owned by its people. This must be stopped,” read their unequivocal statement.

Liverpool FC is within its rights in wanting to protect its brand identity, even if this might be a step too far, and there are extreme cases in world football that illustrate what can go wrong.

Failing to protect rights can have dire consequences. In 2014, former European Cup winners Steaua Bucharest lost their name, club crest and the right to play in their traditional colours in a dispute with their country’s defence ministry. The row led to them turning out for one fixture under the name ‘Champions of Romania’.

It all came to pass after the fall of communism during the Eastern European revolutions of 1989. Steaua Bucharest separated from the Romanian Army and became privately owned, but continued with the name and branding of its army heritage.

When a local businessman bought the club in 2003, the Ministry of National Defence, who own the Steaua sports clubs, issued a lawsuit against the new owner preventing him using the name ‘Steaua’ for the football club.

But there are other examples out there which just highlight the arrogance of some of Europe’s biggest clubs. In 2015, Barcelona attempted to register a trademark of the outline of their seven-pointed crest. Not their badge itself, just the outline.

The EU general court upheld a refusal of the application. The court found that the shape, which did not include the letters FCB or the club’s, had no striking features and would be seen as a decorative shape rather than a badge of origin associated with Barcelona.

Liverpool already has a trademark on ‘You’ll Never Walk Alone’ and ‘This Is Anfield’.

On an individual level, Gareth Bale has trademarked his heart hands celebration, following on from Alan Shearer who did the same with his one-arm salute.

Both players’ activities pale into insignificance when compared to David Beckham’s long list of trademarks, though. They include an image of him taking a free-kick, ‘DB07’, ‘DB23’, ‘Beckham’ and – best of all – ‘Smokey Beckham’. Yes, he’s registered his own flavour of potato crisp.

And let us not forget another attempted Beckham family trademark. Back in 2002, wife Victoria attempted to prevent Peterborough Football Club from trademarking their nickname ‘The Posh’, a name they had been known by for the previous eighty-odd years. Her objection was, thankfully, rejected.

Liverpool may yet decide to withdraw this application, but it has already filed a series of applications with the Intellectual Property Office in the last year that does no paint the club in the best light.

Among them was an application to trademark ‘Allez Allez Allez’, a song sung by supporters during the club’s last two Champions’ League campaigns.

That it was sung by at least six other clubs’ supporters before being lifted by Liverpool’s fans must have eventually registered with FSG, leading to the application sensibly being withdrawn.

After the European Cup win over Tottenham Hotspur last May, the club also applied to register the phrase ‘6 times’ in reference to the number of occasions the trophy has been won.

It is perhaps not surprising, but still such a pity, that a game which has spontaneity, emotion and unpredictability at its core ends up being discussed in these terms.