IRISH FOOTBALL supporters can be secure in the knowledge that the chant 'boys in green' belongs to them, after a Dublin company failed in its bid to score a marketing goal by upholding a trademark registered at the Patents Office.
The Football Association of Ireland (FAI) has secured a declaration of invalidity in respect of a trademark granted to Traditional Craft Ireland, which had registered the phrase 'boys in green' for its exclusive use on memorabilia sold to Irish fans.
At a hearing last week, Tim Cleary, an assistant principal at the Patents Office, said the company had not established that football supporters would identify the phrase or any of the company's designs incorporating the words 'boys in green' as distinguishing its merchandise from any other products available.
Cleary accepted the FAI's argument that the phrase was in common usage as a nickname for the Irish international soccer team. "In view of the relevance of the words 'boys in green' to the expression of support for the national team, I cannot see how those words could be legitimately reserved for use by one undertaking only to the detriment of all other undertakings operating within that market, " he said.
Traditional Craft registered the phrase, and a number of variants including 'boyz in green' and 'boyz 'n green', as trademarks during the build-up to the 2002 World Cup. The company has spent 30,000 on advertising and publicising goods under the name 'boys in green' on flyers and other promotional material. It sold 365,000 worth of 'boys in green' merchandise between 2001 and 2003.
Speaking to the Sunday Tribune in advance of the Patents Office hearing, Traditional Craft director Paul Martin said its 'boys in green' products were widely recognised and had even been worn by Irish supporters featured in a television advertisement for Carlsberg, the 'official beer' of the Irish team.
Despite the evidence produced by the company at the hearing, including labels and tags attached to its merchandise bearing the legend 'boys in green', Cleary said it had not done enough to show that the average consumer would perceive the tags to represent "a trademark of significance".
|