Kits 2019

[Philosophizer]

As already mentioned, Marley's name and image is guarded pretty seriously.

Did they actually get permission from his estate to use it? If so, well done, although that will see a chunk of the profits head to the estate too.

If not, they will be in legal trouble.

If it is all sorted legally, it's a fairly smart piece of business. Even if there is a bit of cringe about how tenuous the connection is, the money will more than negate that.

I think it's an image in his likeness, and not actually an image of Bob himself. At least that's how I heard it described. It's also noticeable that neither Bohs nor O'neills have ever stated it's an image of Bob Marley. I think their official words were something like - "it's a nod to the musical history of dalymount".

I'm sure it's all been planned to avoid any possible legal issues.

[pineapple stu]

I don't know if that's necessarily enough to be honest. While the press release* doesn't say it's an image of Marley, it does mention Marley as part of Dalyer's musical history. And with rastafarian colours, it's hardly a reference Ozzy Osborne or Bob Geldof.

I actually like it though. I wouldn't be caught dead wearing it of course - and not just cos it's a Bohs jersey - but it's something really different which has gained a bit of traction. Fair dues to them. I just hope it doesn't lead to a whole load of unoriginal copies.


* - I genuinely didn't read it before posting my earlier joke - which means I don't know if it was there before I posted or not... But I presume it was. After all, Bohs would hardly plagiarise something. :)

[Kiki Balboa]

Okay, I will be super negative and wum a little.......Like all hipsters, I think hipster club Bohs are a little short on integrity. Great marketing ploy alright and will bring in some extra money and interest from music fans , but surly Dalymount Park is known for other things than music gigs... like it being the home of Irish football. The club is trying to brand itself like an Irish St. Pauli, but where as it is a district of Hamburg is that is known for a history of anti-commercialization and the football club reflects that, Phibsborough is much different and 'normal'.

Also, lets not forget last year, Pats had Pieta house on their Jersey. Bohs have a money making scheme (which has little to do with football, but maybe it will get more people in the door as Dublin is full of hipsters). Nevermind also they employed convicted rapist Akinade to play up front for them. Very progressive by them.

.......
In saying that, its great to have something extra in league and some thinking outside the box. Overall , its always a good occasion that the news coverage is positive for Bohs and everyone

[EatYerGreens]

I think it's an image in his likeness, and not actually an image of Bob himself. At least that's how I heard it described. It's also noticeable that neither Bohs nor O'neills have ever stated it's an image of Bob Marley. I think their official words were something like - "it's a nod to the musical history of dalymount".

I'm sure it's all been planned to avoid any possible legal issues.

I wouldn't be so sure. There are repeated references to the fact that Marley played Dalymount in the press release, and nothing has been said or done by the club yet to say that it ISN'T Markley. They're going along with all the media references to it. So again - are they not guilt of 'passing off' by creating something that is presumed to be Marley for commercial gain ? Why else would a lot of people from around thw world look to buy the shirt except for the whole Marley thing ?

If this becomes news around the world (which it sounds like it is) then it will come across the desk of the Marley Estate at some point. Bohs may well have taken legal advice on this, but you can bet whatever legal team the Marley Estate have access to would eat the Bohs' legal team for breakfast.

Also - the way these things sometimes work out legally is like fishing. You catch the fish on your hook, but let it run the line out a few times before you reel it in fully. The Marley Estate could wait until Bohs have sold a load of these before doing anything legally. By that stage Bohs would be fcuked as they'd already have taken in and probably spent most of the shirts income. In which position it would be a case of 'how much do we need to pay you to not break us?'.

It's still a great initiative btw, and the sort of creative thing all Irish clubs should be doing. I just hope Bohs haven't underestimated the legal risks involved.

[sidewayspasser]

I think it's an image in his likeness, and not actually an image of Bob himself. At least that's how I heard it described. It's also noticeable that neither Bohs nor O'neills have ever stated it's an image of Bob Marley. I think their official words were something like - "it's a nod to the musical history of dalymount".

I'm sure it's all been planned to avoid any possible legal issues.
Where do you draw the line between "an image in his likeness" and "an image of Bob himself"? Or, more important, where would a court draw the line, if it came to that? I think that question isn't trivial, and if neither Bohs nor O'Neills gave it adequate consideration, they may regret it in the long run. They're playing on the perception that it is Bob himself, so they would have a hard time arguing otherwise if they're dragged into court.

[Philosophizer]

I just hope Bohs haven't underestimated the legal risks involved.

Wouldn't it be O'Neills rather than Bohs who would bear the brunt of any potential legal breach though? They're the manufacturer after all. The football club usually only receives 10-15% of shirt sales money with the manufacturer keeping the vast majority. And O'Neills is a MUCH bigger company than Bohs so they'd have far more money to potentially lose in this scenario. Given that, i'm sure they have a legal team who's looked into this.

[nigel-harps1954]

O'Neills wouldn't face any legal issues. They've simply made the jersey requested by Bohs.

[pineapple stu]

Not sure if it'd be that simple. Surely O'Neill's have sourced and/or used the image for example? There has to be some manner of responsibility there too.

(If the image is of Mob Barley, that's ok of course...)

[osarusan]

I think it's an image in his likeness, and not actually an image of Bob himself. At least that's how I heard it described. It's also noticeable that neither Bohs nor O'neills have ever stated it's an image of Bob Marley. I think their official words were something like - "it's a nod to the musical history of dalymount".

I'm sure it's all been planned to avoid any possible legal issues.


Bohs could say it's not Marley, but I am not sure how much of a defence it would be, or how realistically they can argue that they never imagined that anybody would think it was Marley's likeness on the shirt. The mention of Marley in the release, and the rastafarian colours, make it pretty hard to argue that it is all just a coincidence and completely unintended.

[Mr A]

The idea of an LOI club in a High Court Case that isn't a winding up order probably counts as progress.

[Philosophizer]

O'Neills wouldn't face any legal issues. They've simply made the jersey requested by Bohs.

I doubt the "they told us to do it" line would absolve them of any responsibility in a court.

Does anyone actually know how these things work? I don't know much about this area but isn't there official libraries where companies (usually newspapers/magazines/websites) can go and find stock images and pay an amount to legally use the image in their newspaper etc? Maybe Bohs got the image from one of those libraries and paid a fee for it?

[marinobohs]

Presume we can look forward to the shamble rovers 2020 icon shirt (Pepper Pig maybe ��) and the club press release saying how the image is bigger and more "picturey" than any done before and will set the benchmark for shirts going forward. A nationwide tour advising other clubs on how to produce an icon image shirt is inevitable ��

Seriously, awful shirt but magnificent marketing initiative, generated massive coverage for the club, delighted our sponsors, (New) Jersey suppliers and will make a few bob.


The sort of thinking/initiative the League is often lacking.

[pineapple stu]

There is stock imagery alright, but it's rarely of notable/famous people. (In fact, it tends to be the same people in various random poses. Think of a group around an office table pointing at a laptop - that kind of stuff)

I think you can buy the likes of Sportsfile imagery alright - this is how a lot of newspapers operate though I think. So the photographer has ready sales of his photos to the agency, and the agency have ready sales to publishers, typically at a flat rate. Means the purchaser gets a low price for a photo they can use lots of times, the photographer gets a steady price for each photo, and everyone's happy. But I can't see Marley having agency photos of himself out there; the more valuable your image rights, the more protective you are about them, and so I presume you control photographer rights to concerts, etc. (Marley is dead of course, but I presume there were photo agencies or something similar in the 70s)

[Shearer]

Why does everyone hate O'Neill's?

[CorribsideSteve]

Why does everyone hate O'Neill's?
It's mainly just Martin, to be fair

[placid casual]

Presume we can look forward to the shamble rovers 2020 icon shirt (Pepper Pig maybe ��) and the club press release saying how the image is bigger and more "picturey" than any done before and will set the benchmark for shirts going forward. A nationwide tour advising other clubs on how to produce an icon image shirt is inevitable ��
.

Your inferiority complex is very amusing, I must say.🐷🐷

[EatYerGreens]

I doubt the "they told us to do it" line would absolve them of any responsibility in a court.

Does anyone actually know how these things work? I don't know much about this area but isn't there official libraries where companies (usually newspapers/magazines/websites) can go and find stock images and pay an amount to legally use the image in their newspaper etc? Maybe Bohs got the image from one of those libraries and paid a fee for it?

Paying for use of a photo is one thing. The person who took the photo owns the copyright for that (depending on the context in which it was taken).

Trading on a famous person's image is something entirely differently.

[osarusan]

I doubt the "they told us to do it" line would absolve them of any responsibility in a court.

I don't know.

If a business went to a printer looking for say 5000 flyers to be printed, and it turned out that there was a copyrighted photo on the flyer, I don't think the printer would be liable.

I might be wrong though, and it might not be a great analogy. I suppose that the kitmaker has a degree of involvement in the design of a kit than a printer wouldn't have with a flyer, and hard to believe that the question of royalties wouldn't have arisen.

Anyway, regardless of legal liability, it would be an issue they could do without.

[Dalymountrower]

I don't know.

If a business went to a printer looking for say 5000 flyers to be printed, and it turned out that there was a copyrighted photo on the flyer, I don't think the printer would be liable.

I might be wrong though, and it might not be a great analogy. I suppose that the kitmaker has a degree of involvement in the design of a kit than a printer wouldn't have with a flyer, and hard to believe that the question of royalties wouldn't have arisen.

Anyway, regardless of legal liability, it would be an issue they could do without.
TBTF we have no assets. Apparently it is s tribute to our last world cup player, Jimmy Aggry ( or his Da as a young man)

[Mr_Parker]

Is this shirt actually pemisable to be used by a club given Law 4 restrictions of the Laws of the Game?

"When interpreting whether a slogan, statement or image is permissible, note should be taken of Law 12 (Fouls and Misconduct), which requires the referee to take action against a player who is guilty of:

using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gesturesgesturing in a provocative, derisory or inflammatory way

Any slogan, statement or image which falls into any of these categories is not permitted.
Whilst ‘religious’ and ‘personal’ are relatively easily defined, ‘political’ is less clear but slogans, statements or images related to the following are not permitted:

any person(s), living or dead (unless part of the official competition name)"

[Longfordian]

Paging Anthony Buttimer to the thread.

[Eminence Grise]

It's allowed in this case. But only if they play on grass.

[Ezeikial]

Paging Anthony Buttimer to the thread.

Buttimer says no. What was the question again?

[Mr_Parker]

Buttimer says no. What was the question again?

The change to the Law was as a result of row over the 1916 embroidery on the Ireland kit and the inclusion of the poppy emblem on others. So I do think there is a question to be answered.

[Ashbohs]

Wow the passive bitterness on here is palpable. It's going to be the biggest selling LOI jersey ever . Get over it.I haven't seen anywhere online or in print where Bohs have released a statement saying they have a picture of Bob Marley on the jersey.
It could plausibly be kept in club shop for years to come and still sell well each year.
Sales have come in from the 4 corners of the globe .
The latest straw clutcher is stating that it's against the laws of the game. Who cares . It will still sell and be stocked in the shop. I don't think Joey in Canada is worried in the slightest if Bohs do or don't wear it 4 times next season.
It's brought massive PR to Bohs and also by default the league.Its the sort of brave out of the box thinking that the league needs as a whole . I've just order 2000 Rasta wigs to sell on the North Circular Rd

[micls]

You're on one hand trying to claim Bohs never said it was Bob Marley and on the other calling others straw clutchers? Come off it. There isn't a judge in the world that will fall for that nonsense

[Ashbohs]

Stop me when I start telling lies so micls and quote me the press release where Bohs as a club have said anything anywhere about the image referencing it to being Bob Marley. For a judge to fall for any nonsense it has to get to a court
This won't as ONeills are involved, a company with 800 staff and offices in multiple locations. They have also been down this road before with Addidas and won so their legal dept will have done their homework. Unless you are suggesting that such a company would on a whim from a part time football club leave themselves wide open to having their brand dragged through the courts..
Oh by the way, BFC are not obligated to tell the masses on various fora the intimate details of the commercial contracts
How much would that PR cost an average LOI club .
Stay jealous lads

[micls]

Ah go on away with your whataboutery.

An image that one first glance the entire media world associates with Bob Marley, along with the colours of the Jersey. If the club have zero legal concerns at all, then why the deflecting pretending its not supposed to represent Bob Marley.

'But we didn't actually say it was Bob marley! We didn't say it was anyone'.

Whatever about whether the club know what they're doing, I'm sure they've looked into it, but that argument is utter ********. And if it were to come to a judge, you'd be laughed out of court with your 'show me where the club said....' rubbish. It's fooling literally no one.

[micls]

Jealous :D You absolutely must be having a laugh.

[micls]

Ashbohs prayer (loosely based on the narcissists prayer) :

Bohs never said it
But if they did its not a big deal
But if it is O Neills would have checked it
But if they did, Bohs don't have to tell you
And if they do, you're only jealous

[osarusan]

Ashbohs prayer (loosely based on the narcissists prayer) :

Bohs never said it
But if they did its not a big deal
But if it is O Neills would have checked it
But if they did, Bohs don't have to tell you
And if they do, you're only jealous

Put. down. the. sherry.

[Philosophizer]

We're talking about a very very hypothetical situation here, folks. No need to get worked up. I find it v hard to believe that Bohs and especially O'Neills would be retarded enough to leaving themselves open to litigation from the Marley estate.
Maybe we should park the whole debate about image rights until it actually becomes an issue.

[Ashbohs]

Ashbohs prayer (loosely based on the narcissists prayer) :

Bohs never said it
But if they did its not a big deal
But if it is O Neills would have checked it
But if they did, Bohs don't have to tell you
And if they do, you're only jealous

That's very good Micls but I'm not the religious type.
I will pm you when we sell 3k of them and you can pm me when Bohs get sued by someone over selling 3k of them
I'm sure I know who will be first .

[EatYerGreens]

We're talking about a very very hypothetical situation here, folks. No need to get worked up. I find it v hard to believe that Bohs and especially O'Neills would be retarded enough to leaving themselves open to litigation from the Marley estate.
Maybe we should park the whole debate about image rights until it actually becomes an issue.

You forget that this is the club that managed to sell the same piece of land twice, to two different people/companies at the same time ;)

Some would say that was a genius bit of business. Others that it was pretty retarded.

[SkStu]

Different times. Different leadership. Lessons learned (the hard way).

TBWRA

[micls]

That's very good Micls but I'm not the religious type.
I will pm you when we sell 3k of them and you can pm me when Bohs get sued by someone over selling 3k of them
I'm sure I know who will be first .

I hope you do sell 3k of them! Or more. Best of luck with it. I think it's insane, but the league merchandising doing better is good for everyone.

I also assume you won't be sued for it, you have to assume the club did their due diligence.

What I question is YOUR logic for it, not the clubs. The 'they never said it was Marley' nonsense. And then the contractions that followed. As well as the usual jealousy rubbish. We've sold that many jerseys before, it's great! No jealousy needed

[pineapple stu]

It's an echo back to the glory days of foot.ie - Drogheda/Shels/Fingal/Gretna/Bohs fans telling us their club is great and everyone else is bitter/jealous.

Thought we'd moved on from that lately, but evidently not.

[ArFella]

It's an echo back to the glory days of foot.ie - Drogheda/Shels/Fingal/Gretna/Bohs fans telling us their club is great and everyone else is bitter/jealous.

Thought we'd moved on from that lately, but evidently not.

TBH this thread has been great craic, at least it's not the same old Dundalk v Cork or Shams v Everyone Else **** throwing that has been rehashed on threads here on a weekly basis.

Bohs Marley is a breath of fresh air, or maybe a breath of something else ;)

[Philosophizer]

You forget that this is the club that managed to sell the same piece of land twice, to two different people/companies at the same time ;)


That's exactly what i mean. Given that they've been through the ringer recently, and O'Neills had a copywright case with adidas a few years ago too, the chances of both of them leaving themselves open on this must be very small.

[micls]

Loi fan thinks that his club couldn't possibly do something that ridiculous or stupid......

Next time on The Greatest League in the World

[Philosophizer]

It's an echo back to the glory days of foot.ie - Drogheda/Shels/Fingal/Gretna/Bohs fans telling us their club is great and everyone else is bitter/jealous.

Thought we'd moved on from that lately, but evidently not.

In fairness we're on a football forum. Fans are emotional creatures. There will inevitably be bitterness, jealousy and begrudgery, no matter how much people pretend to rise above it.

[Dalymountrower]

It's an echo back to the glory days of foot.ie - Drogheda/Shels/Fingal/Gretna/Bohs fans telling us their club is great and everyone else is bitter/jealous.

Thought we'd moved on from that lately, but evidently not.

A lot of amusing enough nonsense about a marketing ploy to flog a shirt that is unlikely ever to be worn on the pitch, not exactly the sort of existential stuff that Stu refers to above. ( The funniest one was from a Hoop who suggested that the shirt on a fuller figure would more than resemble the late and great Mr Barry White, positioned just under Mr Green.:D)
Over 1000 pre sold already apparently

[marinobohs]

You forget that this is the club that managed to sell the same piece of land twice, to two different people/companies at the same time ;)

Some would say that was a genius bit of business. Others that it was pretty retarded.

what do those people say about two sets of player contracts ?

[marinobohs]

It's an echo back to the glory days of foot.ie - Drogheda/Shels/Fingal/Gretna/Bohs fans telling us their club is great and everyone else is bitter/jealous.

Thought we'd moved on from that lately, but evidently not.

As usual no mention of any shams posters there Stu ? whoops, your green and white slip is showing, guess we haven't moved on from that either.

[micls]

Wait, what? How do ye plan on not wearing your away jersey?! In that case, why call it your away jersey?

[pineapple stu]

A lot of amusing enough nonsense about a marketing ploy to flog a shirt that is unlikely ever to be worn on the pitch
Absolutely.

Until Ashbohs came charging along unfortunately...


Wait, what? How do ye plan on not wearing your away jersey?! In that case, why call it your away jersey?
I could see it making sense actually. Make a one-off jersey for a bit of promotion, then not actually wear it (e.g. if the rules above on what's not allowed on your jersey are correct). All good PR.


As usual no mention of any shams posters there Stu ? whoops, your green and white slip is showing, guess we haven't moved on from that either.
Don't recall too many Rovers fans on here denying their club was going belly-up when it was. Happy to be corrected though.

[marinobohs]

It's an echo back to the glory days of foot.ie - Drogheda/Shels/Fingal/Gretna/Bohs fans telling us their club is great and everyone else is bitter/jealous.

Thought we'd moved on from that lately, but evidently not.

Are you sure now its beyond you to find a sham supporter using those terms about anyone else ? People might think you are, for some reason, choosing not to look ;)

[pineapple stu]

I'm sure I could have listed them and plenty other clubs too. Not sure why you're singling out Rovers. (Well...)

But I was mainly thinking of the fans of clubs who were getting into big financial trouble and refused to acknowledge it. Plus Gretna, because SuperGretna was gas.

[Mr A]

You're on one hand trying to claim Bohs never said it was Bob Marley and on the other calling others straw clutchers? Come off it. There isn't a judge in the world that will fall for that nonsense

Maybe in Texas.

[SkStu]

Ky-Mani Marley approves...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45990043