Media Discussion - 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
mancboy said:
So because now i think they are doomed to failure they are trying to push the tagline that we only got off because we could hire the best lawyers and it wasnt a fair fight.

Two things are wrong with this scenario, firstly the pl have more than enough funds to hire anyone they want IF they believed their case had merit and secondly top lawyers are not prone to taking cases that they dont believe they have a fair to good chance of winning, if they took on losers ad nauseum it would cause them massive reputational damage and they wouldnt be top lawyers for very long.
Click to expand...
My response to this line of argument is …

Look you know we’re guilty right? And I know we’re guilty. And we both know fuck all about legal stuff or accountancy and finance right? So if we both know City are definitely guilty with zero expertise, how the fuck can a team of highly paid lawyers and accountants not prove anything? It shouldn’t matter who City have defending them, if two idiots like us know they are guilty then why can’t anything be proved?
 
HelloCity said:
18 months ago

View attachment 103423
Click to expand...

18 months ago or not.

He should change his 2nd name to John Blurt.

That’s right, John. Klopp who has won 1 PL title. Pep has won 5 PL titles. Klopp has never won 4 carabao cups on the run. Has never won 3 PL titles on the run. Has never done the English domestic double, treble and quadruple in one season. Has never done ‘the treble’, as PL Champions. Has never won 5 trophies in one calendar year. Has never got to 100 PL points. Etc.

You’re full of shit Blurt, you Klopp and Liverpool loving shill.

I hope Sheikh Mansour buys the Torygraph and sacks you.
 
Last edited:
billymumphrey said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when it comes to trademarks, isn't there a legal imperative to act to protect it? The absence of doing so then leaves the holder at risk of further infringement because they let one through to the keeper so to speak.

Everton copped some bad press for going after a small business owner for this reason. (https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/dec/11/everton-fc-farm-shop-legal-action). If they let this go then it sets a precedent for others to infringe and use the name.
Click to expand...
Honestly don’t know mate, but who would decide the previous one was an infringement if the brand owner didn’t challenge it?

And that rule doesn’t seem to apply to Nike in terms of all the snide gear they don’t challenge because they don’t know about its provenance.

But fuck knows tbh. Maybe there is!
 
jaiguruKun said:
www.theguardian.com

Who killed Sancho’s United career? The club? Ten Hag? Or maybe just football | Barney Ronay

Most sporting failures have a pattern but, as the winger nears a loan return to Borussia Dortmund, this feels like a fault in the way things should work
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Normally I enjoy Ronay's work but this one left me very confused. Maybe that's the point?
Click to expand...
Clarkie I presume, as Ronay is the biggest fucking hypocritical* bore in the media. Not half as funny or clever as he thinks he is.

*check out his comments on Putin around the time of the Russia world cup
 
Even in a black and white cartoon format they’ve got no self awareness.

Those words that accompany the cartoon picture couldn’t be further from the truth.

Begging for £1 a month subscription.

IMG_0167.jpeg

SUPPORT THE GUARDIAN FOR AS LITTLE AS
ONE POUND /EURO / DOLLAR - IT ONLY TAKES A MINUTE. IF YOU CAN, PLEASE CONSIDER SUPPORTING US WITH A
REGULAR AMOUNT EACH MONTH. THANK YOU X
 
jrb said:
Even in a black and white cartoon format they’ve got no self awareness.

Those words that accompany the cartoon picture couldn’t be further from the truth.

Begging for £1 a month subscription.

View attachment 103429

SUPPORT THE GUARDIAN FOR AS LITTLE AS
ONE POUND /EURO / DOLLAR - IT ONLY TAKES A MINUTE. IF YOU CAN, PLEASE CONSIDER SUPPORTING US WITH A
REGULAR AMOUNT EACH MONTH. THANK YOU X
Click to expand...
Begging cunts
 
jrb said:
Even in a black and white cartoon format they’ve got no self awareness.

Those words that accompany the cartoon picture couldn’t be further from the truth.

Begging for £1 a month subscription.

View attachment 103429

SUPPORT THE GUARDIAN FOR AS LITTLE AS
ONE POUND /EURO / DOLLAR - IT ONLY TAKES A MINUTE. IF YOU CAN, PLEASE CONSIDER SUPPORTING US WITH A
REGULAR AMOUNT EACH MONTH. THANK YOU X
Click to expand...

A row of grinning fuckwits.
 
Andy TheCatalyst Morrison said:
My response to this line of argument is …

Look you know we’re guilty right? And I know we’re guilty. And we both know fuck all about legal stuff or accountancy and finance right? So if we both know City are definitely guilty with zero expertise, how the fuck can a team of highly paid lawyers and accountants not prove anything? It shouldn’t matter who City have defending them, if two idiots like us know they are guilty then why can’t anything be proved?
Click to expand...
hey i am NOT an idiot, im a dumbass lol
 
jrb said:
Even in a black and white cartoon format they’ve got no self awareness.

Those words that accompany the cartoon picture couldn’t be further from the truth.

Begging for £1 a month subscription.

View attachment 103429

SUPPORT THE GUARDIAN FOR AS LITTLE AS
ONE POUND /EURO / DOLLAR - IT ONLY TAKES A MINUTE. IF YOU CAN, PLEASE CONSIDER SUPPORTING US WITH A
REGULAR AMOUNT EACH MONTH. THANK YOU X
Click to expand...
Those cartoons are inaccurate, Ronay doesn't have that much hair.
 
billymumphrey said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when it comes to trademarks, isn't there a legal imperative to act to protect it? The absence of doing so then leaves the holder at risk of further infringement because they let one through to the keeper so to speak.

Everton copped some bad press for going after a small business owner for this reason. (https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/dec/11/everton-fc-farm-shop-legal-action). If they let this go then it sets a precedent for others to infringe and use the name.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of vogue trying to sue that pub for the use of their name, until the pub wrote back telling them to swivel as the pub had been there for hundreds of years before the crap mag even started publishing. They wrote a sniveling apology letter back to them saying sorry for the misunderstanding. Wankers.
 
mancboy said:
tbf why would we support a rival airline, tbh its disgusting that they are allowed to sponsor the fa cup and arsenal anyway
Click to expand...

Yea remember that semi final where City got screwed over against arsenal ? Emirates team helped to beat Etihad team in a cup sponsored by Emirates. Always thought it is wrong for a team and a competition to have the same sponsors.
 
Superdry clothes are wank anyway tbf, our City store lot should down the escalators and torch their shop in the arndale ;-)
 
superdry sue everybody ,look at their history, its obviously a marketing ploy to remain relevant and edgy but throw citys name into it and it becomes a story
 
mexico1970 said:
It's almost as bad as the Hamilton watch scandal, how dare Hamilton watches be allowed to use the Hamilton name, they've only been making watches since 1892.

timeandtidewatches.com

Hamilton Vs Hamilton: F1 superstar Lewis Hamilton loses legal battle with Hamilton watches

In a very strange case, Lewis Hamilton loses legal battle with Hamilton watches after claiming his right to the name "Hamilton".
timeandtidewatches.com timeandtidewatches.com
Click to expand...
the ego of some of these 'celebs' and companies is incredible, the fact that superdry believe that people would think that man city would associate themselves with a mediocre high street brand as a kit sponsor when they have some of the biggest names in the world paying hundreds of millions to associate themselves with us is an pathetic if anything they should be glad of the quasi association not suing us for it but hey its a sad but predictable way of getting the name back in the press while potentially gaining some much needed funds (although i highly doubt that)
 
mancboy said:
the ego of some of these 'celebs' and companies is incredible, the fact that superdry believe that people would think that man city would associate themselves with a mediocre high street brand as a kit sponsor when they have some of the biggest names in the world paying hundreds of millions to associate themselves with us is an pathetic if anything they should be glad of the quasi association not suing us for it but hey its a sad but predictable way of getting the name back in the press while potentially gaining some much needed funds (although i highly doubt that)
Click to expand...

Just surprised that lot from Trafford hasn't tried to sue us for using Manchester in our name yet.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
My girlfriend used to work in advertising
Click to expand...
Mate, I've told you before that walking around a boxing ring in skimpy clothing, between rounds, carrying a number, or draped over the bonnet of a car at a motor show, doesn't really constitute 'working in advertising'.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
The Telegraph is shitting its pants at the thought of a Sheikh Mansour funded takeover.

Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please let this happen.
Click to expand...

They let other none British people companies take over other newspapers so if they refuse or block it it's pure racism
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top