On Dec 19, 9:07 pm, John Rumm <see.my.signat...@nowhere.null> wrote:
> On 19/12/2012 19:13, Jim K wrote:
>
> > On Dec 19, 12:44 am, John Stumbles <
john.stumb...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> >> Of course it's only badge engineering but it's an interesting
> >> reflection on CORGI that they should try to exploit their reputation with
> >> the public by putting their name to what must be, at best, fairly meh
> >> bits of kit.
>
> > erm .... As CORGI is a long defunct entity I was under the impression
> > "they"don;t have a reputation anymore?
>
> Well the name is still well known even if they no longer have the
> government sponsored accreditation gig...
>
> (gov apparently did not realise they did not have the rights to the name
> and thought they could shift it to them that are now Gas Safe)
>
> > Just numerous shady shysters happily allowing gullible punters to
> > believe they do by putting "corgi" all over anything?
>
> Presumably the dodgy shysters would actually need to be CORGI to use
> their trade mark since they still exist as a legal entity and hence
> could defend their trade mark.