Virgin family feud close to resolution

[Dave Noble]

A LONG-RUNNING dispute between Sir Richard Branson's Virgin empire and his Australian offshoot, Virgin Blue, over the use of the Virgin name is nearing an end.

The two have been in ''negotiations'' for nearly two years about whether Virgin Blue has the rights to slap the V Australia brand, the name of its trans-Pacific airline, on a wide variety of goods.

FUll article at Virgin family feud close to resolution

Dave

 

[samh004]

It's a pretty serious issue, and I can't see why it is an issue. Surely the original licensing would have just been for the airline, I can't imagine Richard Branson, with all his previous licensing experience would have made the mistake of letting them use the name for whatever they liked.

Seems like Virgin Blue is getting coughy.

I like the Virgin brand, I don't use any of their products though, and I think the Virgin group in the UK should own the name and decide what it can be used for, not the Australian off-shoot.

 

[SeaWolf]

I guess it depends on if you see V Australia as a Virgin brand. I mean, it doesn't say 'Virgin' and the logo looks nothing like the Virgin logo, so is it a Virgin brand simply because it's owned by another Virgin brand and uses the letter V? Or is it a seperate brand?

I mean, think about it, if a seperate entity had setup an airline and called it V Australia, would Virgin group be able to pursue them over licensing rights? Bear in mind that Apple can't pursue companies that have labeled product iSomething. A letter is very much generic.

 

[samh004]

I guess it depends on if you see V Australia as a Virgin brand. I mean, it doesn't say 'Virgin' and the logo looks nothing like the Virgin logo, so is it a Virgin brand simply because it's owned by another Virgin brand and uses the letter V? Or is it a seperate brand?

From what I read, I thought the issue was more about Virgin Blue trying to brand anything and everything, not just "V Australia", though I'm sure that's a part of it.

I mean, think about it, if a seperate entity had setup an airline and called it V Australia, would Virgin group be able to pursue them over licensing rights?

In "V Australia", what does the V actually stand for? If nothing else, there is an association to the Virgin brand and they are banking on that to sell flights.

So if a separate entity created "V Australia", I'd expect the question to be, what does the V stand for and why are you using that letter. It would be too similar to just be a coincidence.

Bear in mind that Apple can't pursue companies that have labeled product iSomething. A letter is very much generic.

They do try though!

 

[pauly7]

Virgin has publically stated they want a common name for all their aircraft operations. Their branding is a dogs breakfast at the moment (because of all the restrictions) so this will be a great move for them,

Any bets on what will transpire? V-Aus on everything or will they get Virgin approved....

 

[SeaWolf]

Any bets on what will transpire? V-Aus on everything or will they get Virgin approved....

I'm not sure they'd want to put V-Aus on everything, it might be a bit strong for their domestic NZ operations. Although I guess QANTAS use to operate with a roo on the tail just fine.