Writer & commentator Phillip Adams has demanded Qantas remove the national airline’s ‘Spirit of Australia’ tagline from all branding immediately

[cosi]

Interesting

Qantas tagline author tells CEO to remove it from all branding, as airline battles multiple PR crises

Phillip Adams has demanded the boss of Qantas remove the national airline's 'Spirit of Australia' tagline from all branding immediately, as multiple crises engulf the company.

www.smartcompany.com.au

 

[dylarr]

The request is only symbolic in nature however as the legal owner of the mark across a multitude of trademark classes is Qantas Airways Limited.

 

[jb747]

And presumably Phillip was paid for his term....but I don't hear him offering to give the payment back.

 

[Vic]

And presumably Phillip was paid for his term....but I don't hear him offering to give the payment back.

Well that's the thing with content creators, it's their intellectual property. I'm not sure receiving a fee to allow qantas to use that property removes the right to revoke permission to use it.
But then Adams would need to test that in court

 

[justinbrett]

It's not exactly an original phrase, I mean there's a ferry named the Spirit of Tasmania, a train named the Spirit of Queensland, an award called the Spirit of South Australia - and countless things called the Spirit of America.

Derivative at best.

 

[dylarr]

Well that's the thing with content creators, it's their intellectual property. I'm not sure receiving a fee to allow qantas to use that property removes the right to revoke permission to use it.
But then Adams would need to test that in court

It's Qantas' intellectual property because they own the trademark in the relevant classes per the IP Australia database. They have legal rights to use the mark in the classes under which it is registered (which are all the ones that matter - from travel related right through to it being used on clothing).

 

[Vic]

It's Qantas' intellectual property because they own the trademark in the relevant classes per the IP Australia database. They have legal rights to use the mark in the classes under which it is registered (which are all the ones that matter - from travel related right through to it being used on clothing).

Not if they didn't create it... The creator also has rights. But like I said only a court can resolve this question, not twitter.

oh, and I'm not interested is arguing the toss...

 

[algae]

Not if they didn't create it... The creator also has rights. But like I said only a court can resolve this question, not twitter.

oh, and I'm not interested is arguing the toss...

If the creator worked for an advertising company, who was paid by Qantas to come up with branding.... Then the creator has no rights to it.

 

[TheRealTMA]

Not if they didn't create it... The creator also has rights. But like I said only a court can resolve this question, not twitter.

oh, and I'm not interested is arguing the toss...

Not actually. There creator is not necessarily the owner of the IP and can depend on the agreements at the time of the work. The trademark registsred by a company and first used by that company lies with the company not the creator(s) as such.

 

[RooFlyer]

If the creator worked for an advertising company, who was paid by Qantas to come up with branding.... Then the creator has no rights to it.

I don’t think hat’s correct either. It depends on the contracts between the parties (creator/ agency and agency/ client) as to where IP or copyright ownership lies. Mere payment isn’t enough. At least when my company formally explored this 10 years ago.

But I do think Adams is on very thin to no ice here.

 

[TheRealTMA]

I don’t think hat’s correct either. It depends on the contracts between the parties (creator/ agency and agency/ client) as to where IP or copyright ownership lies. Mere payment isn’t enough. At least when my company formally explored this 10 years ago.

But I do think Adams is on very thin to no ice here.

Remember the law changed some years ago (2003 I think? - before that the creator did not have automatic rights and the client held the copyright and IP) so it maye be at the time the logo and phrase was created, the client obtained all the IP rights.

 

[Ozman]

Better if they got rid of the leprechaun

 

[samh004]

Better if they got rid of the leprechaun

If you have to result to name calling to get a point across... It's not hard to say his name, or is this a children's playground?

I'm sure there are many reasons to get new blood in the role, but what do you think the next CEO is going to do differently? Give everyone pay rises across the board, bring all call centres back to Australia and pay the increased wages that will result in, provide champagne in business class and lounges, all while reducing the price of the tickets. Hmm... as a business I would have thought all of those things would send them broke. And maybe you don't want any of them, but the reality is that the next CEO will be focused on profits for the shareholders too. It's a business.

Post automatically merged: Jun 28, 2022

And presumably Phillip was paid for his term....but I don't hear him offering to give the payment back.

That's what I figured when I first read it. He created it and sold that to Qantas.

Slippery slope if a court says a creator can accept money for a service and then later on take back the service, but perhaps not give back the increased value of the payment

 

[TheRealTMA]

...

Slippery slope if a court says a creator can accept money for a service and then later on take back the service, but perhaps not give back the increased value of the payment

Yes it is a slipperry slope and that's exactly why the IP law changed. A creator or artist can be paid for the work but can also keep the IP for the work unless it's specifically passsed to the client. Lots of designers and artists complained that they were poorly paid for a work which subsequently went on to be much more valuable than when they designed created it. And, some artists now can receive payments when a work is resold at a higher price.

 

[Melburnian1]

And presumably Phillip was paid for his term....but I don't hear him offering to give the payment back.

QF has received outstanding value over many years for what Mr Adams claims he created, much as I don't like Mr Adams.

It's milked the phrase for much, even though foreign ownership of the company is somewhere around 40 per cent (can't be above 49pc due to the Qantas Sale Act 1992 and amending legislation passed in 2014). In 2019, QF advised its foreign ownership was about 36pc but this may understate the level.

 

[cbourl]

Qantas The Spirit of An Australia long gone -that should be their new motto Speak to some employees and they wil ltell you what they think of the ex-Ansett CEO

 

[DC3]

Just think of ‘spirit’ as referring to (some) alcohol. Much easier that way.

 

[justinbrett]

Just think of ‘spirit’ as referring to (some) alcohol. Much easier that way.

Which, thankfully, is back in J.

 

[leadman]

It's not exactly an original phrase, I mean there's a ferry named the Spirit of Tasmania, a train named the Spirit of Queensland, an award called the Spirit of South Australia - and countless things called the Spirit of America.

Derivative at best.

And the "Spirit of Progress", unfortunately gone like the "Southern, Western and Northern Mails". Those were the start of my travelling oh so long ago.

 

[HS-TQE]

Qantas The Spirit of An Australia long gone -that should be their new motto Speak to some employees and they wil ltell you what they think of the ex-Ansett CEO

Toomey? That bloke disappeared after the collapse and led some airline in PNG years after the collapse