"Flying Scot" would be a trademark for bicycles, not a copyright. Flying Scot does not have sufficient expressive content for copyright protection.
The name has never been registered in the US for bicycles per the US Patent and Trademark Office.
Protection is available for non-registered trademarks, but not when the name is no longer used in commerce in the US, as is the case with Flying Scot. At this point anyone could use the trademark in the US and even register it.
So Brandon could grab Flying Scot, I think Flying Monkey would be a better choice.
At 10:53 AM 5/24/01 -0400, Moos, Jerry wrote:
>Sounds like maybe someone engaged in a little copyright infringement. I
>suppose if a CA seller had these made in Taiwan, a locally-focused firm in
>Scotland would be unlikely to discover it.
>From: Monkeyman [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 10:23 AM
>To: Bob Reid
>Subject: Re: [CR]Flying Scot picks up the American gauntlet
>I really don't want to get involved in another stupid battle. Look,
>it, may one of "your" Flying Scots, but it is A Flying Scot. It's a
>cheap bike boom Japanese built, it's not a relabled anything. After
>15 years as a mechanic I can tell relabeled bikes. I'd love to send
>you perfect pictures, you send me the camera. . . better yet if
>you're willing to pay the shipping I'll send the bike to you. The
>bike can be yours for shipping. My guess is someone in the US during
>the bike boom saw a Flying Scot and liked them then had a bunch of
>bikes label Flying Scot in Asia to sell in his auto parts store.
>Again, if you want better info on the bike send me a camera or
>PS: I don't mean to be harsh I'm just getting a little tired of the
>fire storm surrounding me.
>>Trust you guys, to pick a fight when I'm away from the computer.......
>>> OK, at my apartment complex is a Flying Scot and it's an absolute
>>> department store bike. What's the story with these? It seems like a
>>> strange name to licence out to POS bikes?
>>(Brandon) Despite your rather poor quality pictures from what I can see
>>is not a Flying Scot. If you knew even the remotest bit about the company
>>or chose to take the time to look at the marque, or even my Website you
>>would be very suspicious as well. Give me the frame number (and the
>>location of them) and some decent photographs of the lugs, frame ends, BB
>>shell and head tube badge I'll let you know.
>>Now for a very brief :-) history lesson ;
>>At no time were Flying Scot's ever built under licence - The original
>>company ran solely with the name until around 1983 and from this time the
>>trade mark "The Flying Scot" was purchased by a local Cycle shop owner -
>>on a rare occassion has them built to order by Dave Yates at M.Steel's.
>>At it's peak David Rattray's (small) company produced Flying Scot frames
>>and cycles from 1928 to about 1983 (war years excluded) at a maximum rate
>>1000 units a year - one year only (though I've never seen any with a frame
>>number above 700) and 5-600 a year seem a bit more realistic.
>>The companies products were so succesful (club, touring, road, track) for
>>it's size that there was no need to (a) advertise globally or in fact in
>>anything other than local cycling publications (b) Bother attending the
>>annual cycling show in London. If you didn't know what a Flying Scot was
>>(and I don't mean a "bicycle") you were certainly not a club cyclist.
>>Quality and reputation alone sold these bikes in volumes that there small
>>factory (the back shop) could cope with
>>ALL frames were made from Reynolds H.M. / 531 or K.R.O.M.O. (briefly for a
>>few years after WWII) and ALL used quality lugs. almost every lug style
>>available from a variety of manufacturers during the production years was
>>offered as an option and appears on a frame somewhere - remember these were
>>almost all custom made.
>>Many Flying Scot's were exported abroad, including many to the U.S and
>>Canada - a lot of these were bought "blind" by letter - again sold on
>>quality and reputation alone.
>>As Flying Scot's were never cheap, from time to time you do come across
>>fakes - These were not fakes in that they were intended to be sold as such,
>>just some folks thought if they badged up their cheap bike, everyone would
>>think they had one - such was the attraction of the name. There was a
>>spell before the companies demise, when Steyr-Puch (who took a 49% share in
>>the company in the 70's and whose manager kindly burnt all the frame
>>one day) were "alleged" to be pushing out any old junk with the Flying Scot
>>badge on it to get money in - This is unsubstantiated, but considering they
>>had difficulty selling there own crap bikes, not beyond the realms of
>>possibility. I am interested Brandon - to know If that bike is one of the
>>SDP products as I've never seen one.
>>If you think this is all B.S. the 12th International Cycling History
>>Conference is scheduled to be held 26-28 September 2001 in Sanremo, Italy -
>>And one of the proposed papers to be presented is on David Rattray's
>>- not bad for a KRAZEE-KUTS MART bike ?
>>I'll make two offers ;
>>(a) If your ever end up touring Scotland and your in the North-East of
>>Scotland, call in to the shop. I'd gladly allow you a spin on one for
>>"nominal" refundable deposit as security.
>>(b) I'll back Bruce up in his offer to Brian of a frame when the next one
>>comes up. I must admit that a non-Scot evaluation of the build quality
>>would be of great value if a little naval gazing.............you know
>>Well, thanks for winding me up..............