F1 trademarks the shoey

[05XR8]

https://www.speedcafe.com/2018/05/01/formula-1-trademarks-shoey/

Why?

 

[TenEightyOne]

https://www.speedcafe.com/2018/05/01/formula-1-trademarks-shoey/

Why?

They've trademarked the word for use on clothing goods - not the act itself (or the colloquial naming thereof). Their trademark is also only applicable to certain territories but interestingly Australia is one.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Is this cultural appropriation? As an Australian, I’m feeling quite offended.

 

[05XR8]

They've trademarked the word for use on clothing goods - not the act itself (or the colloquial naming thereof). Their trademark is also only applicable to certain territories but interestingly Australia is one.

As per Cap'n Jack's post, that's my 'Why'.

 

[Vagabond]

I assume its because Liberty Media are a profit driven organisation who see everything as an opportunity, no matter how ridiculous. I also assume you started this topic hoping others would be more vocal in discussing it, particularly since your opening gambit is just one word...

 

[05XR8]

I assume its because Liberty Media are a profit driven organisation who see everything as an opportunity, no matter how ridiculous. I also assume you started this topic hoping others would be more vocal in discussing it, particularly since your opening gambit is just one word...

Hey, someone could have posted "Why not?". Wouldn't have phased me.

It'd be like VASC trademarking "'Murica", for all their big drinks at races.

 

[TheCracker]

Perhaps Liberty are about to unveil their new range of mouth-veruca ointments?

 

[daan]

Perhaps Liberty are about to unveil their new range of mouth-veruca ointments?

Coincidence?

 

[TenEightyOne]

As per Cap'n Jack's post, that's my 'Why'.

So I answered correctly? I'm lost

In reference to Cap'n Jack's post they haven't trademarked the act (although your thread title suggests they have), just the word in certain contexts. I disagree with them being be able to do that.

 

[05XR8]

.

So I answered correctly? I'm lost

In reference to Cap'n Jack's post they haven't trademarked the act (although your thread title suggests they have), just the word in certain contexts. I disagree with them being be able to do that.

Ah, okay. Got ya. I just used the title Speedacafe used. Missed the quotation marks.

 

[05XR8]

Chris Stubbs, a Virgin Australia Supercars reporter, mentioned Ricciardo will continue the tradition of the shoey, but it'ii be called a "booty".

 

[Saidur_Ali]

They've trademarked the word for use on clothing goods

So I answered correctly?

Incorrectly answered.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Incorrectly answered.

Clothing goods and other household goods, to expand on that. They have not trademarked the act. Source.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Clothing goods and other household goods, to expand on that. They have not trademarked the act. Source.

On the article posted by OP, it mentions following:

"The sport does not, however, own the rights to Shoey branded clothing, which belongs to a separate company based out of Queensland."

 

[TenEightyOne]

On the article posted by OP, it mentions following:

"The sport does not, however, own the rights to Shoey branded clothing, which belongs to a separate company based out of Queensland."

A couple of errors there. Firstly: the company is based within Queensland, not without. Secondly: if you look up Shoey (I even gave you the link for goodness' sake!) you'll see who owns which type of trademark where. Formula 1 BV also own the trademark for clothing (and other items) in certain territories.