Police rip off

[yaleguy3]

I sell safes and locks that are Police approved and registered.
The packaging comes with the Police logos on them , the locks have a BS stamp and a Police sticker on them so on my website I used the Police logo on the appropriate descriptive page and blow me didn't I get ten rapid response firearms cops threatening to blow my head off!!!

Well not exactly but I did get a snotty letter threatening further action and a bit of tittle tattle to trading standards if I didn't remove the logos from my website as they were registered to the police.
Oh I was told that I could display them if I crossed some coppers greasy palm with TWO THOUSAND POUNDS!!...

What a rip off!

They can stick the logos' up their ass. The logos don't get the stuff flying faster than anything else off the shelves , price as always dictates sales so they can sod off.
If the police want me to advertise them they can PAY ME!

Nice to know that the same week they are found to be crap at solving crimes I am harrased for something so pathetic.

Does tossers get past the swear filter?

Anyway I just invented my own logo and changed the wording. Joe public wouldn't even know the difference anyway.

 

[Johnmelad502]

Algerian Police?

 

[daneski88]

Does t*****s get past the swear filter?

no, but "tasers" does

Anyway I just invented my own logo and changed the wording. Joe public wouldn't even know the difference anyway.

So you won't mind me stealing your logo for my own personal use (I intend to sell safes and locks that are approved by burglars )? Many thanks

 

[yaleguy3]

The point is - the Police test and approve items (in my case safes and locks) they meet an approved standard and are marked as such but I cannot advertise to potential customers that they have met an approved standard.
makes it pointless.
Of course I can advertise they reach that standard if I pay £2000 A YEAR to ACPO which is the same slimey organisation that sells DVLA data for £70 that only costs itself £5.

These clowns are a throwback to the New Labour era and the sooner Cameron chucks them in the rubbish pile with everything else the better.

 

[Mickymoody]

In one line you say they are Police approved, then say the Police disapprove, and want to take you to court?

So go to court. If they have been passed by the Police, then you are legit. If they disagree, they lose. Otherwise you are lying, and made something up.

Costs nothing to go to court, as they are bringing the prosecution, so stand up for yourself, you say they are Police approved. So why change the design? Surely you have a letter that says that it approved? So why post? No brainer.

 

[daneski88]

The point is - the Police test and approve items (in my case safes and locks) they meet an approved standard and are marked as such but I cannot advertise to potential customers that they have met an approved standard.
makes it pointless.
Of course I can advertise they reach that standard if I pay £2000 A YEAR to ACPO which is the same slimey organisation that sells DVLA data for £70 that only costs itself £5.

Ok, joking apart. Who validated the fact that your product has met an approved standard - and was it free for you to do so? If you have incurred a cost, then it seems entirely reasonable for you to use their name in your advertising. If it was free, then surely it seems reasonable for someone (in particular you ) to have to foot the bill for their services, although £2000pa is steep.

These clowns are a throwback to the New Labour era and the sooner Cameron chucks them in the rubbish pile with everything else the better.

You mean self-financing quangos'? Yep, I agree ( a bit like traffic wardens financing their wages through new and unnecessary parking fines)

 

[mattchip]

I've had this myself mate, but to be fair there copy right laws are in force on pictures on the net,you can't just grab anyone without paying. Best to go to a website that stocks images like istock and pay a small fee for legit photos - they would't have a leg to stand on then

 

[jctilingservices]

may i suggest a kind of compromise, it may work/ look ok then again it may not.

Can you not take a photo of the item with the police sticker on, and use that rather than the official police logo, then you would be in breech of no laws at all, and potential customers would actually see the goods are police approved.
just an idea mate

 

[yaleguy3]

To clarify I started fitting safes and locks.
To keep things simple I will just illustrate the stupidity of the safes saga.
Now these safes are made by Yale
Yale had these safes checked by ACPO and the 'Secure by Design' initiative which involves testing and approving security devices and much more to see wether they meet the approved standard.
Yale join the 'Secure by Design scheme' No doubt payiing many thousand of pounds to do so as the Officer I spoke to said your entry fee depends on your organisations size (In the same breath he also claimed not to be trying to make money).
So Yale have approved products and they put the schemes logo on their packaging.

So i buy in the safes and offer them to clients but stupidly I am unable to advertise the fact that these safes have been tested and approved by the police even though Yale have paid for the privilege already.
Basically one wonders why Yale even bothered to join the scheme when their outlets aren't allowed to mention their credentials.

Yes I used the logo on my website but not as an attempt to steal the logo for my own use but just to clarify the safes I had sourced from Yale had met the stringent standards.

As mentioned I have now designed my own logo which says everything the other logo said but now I don't have to fork out £2000.

What really annoyed me about the whole saga was the letter threatening further action or being reported to trading standards.

I see they only solve 25% of crimes so perhaps well intentioned individuals like me are easy targets for those pen pushing quango rats.

 

[yaleguy3]

No attempt to claim police approval myself

The logos were applied only with specific images and text with no ambiguity. The only reason I couldn't display the logo was not because of the product or labelling but purely because I hadn't paid acpo £2000 for the privilege.

They said they would have have no problem with the logos use by myself as long as I paid the money.

 

[yaleguy3]

To jctiling.

I have thought of that approach and is one I may in fact use.
The police themselves said I could use the term police approved and then link to the particular product on the Yale website or use Yales distributed litrature.
Personally I cannot be bothered with the police as they stick their noses in all crime prevention areas from neighbourhood watch groups to council approved traders.

The truth is its a rip off cartel of ex police officers distributing work for themselves.

If I sold moody goods I would have more chance of being left alaone than someone attempting to protect the public from crime.

The irony is certainly not lost on myself.

 

[Mw Roofline]

We used to install Rubberbond EPDM that we purchased from a Rubberbond distributor and so used their logo on our website. We too had a snotty letter from Rubberbond asking us to remove the logo, which we did.

We now purchase from Firestone

 

[Mickymoody]

To clarify I started fitting safes and locks.
To keep things simple I will just illustrate the stupidity of the safes saga.
Now these safes are made by Yale
Yale had these safes checked by ACPO and the 'Secure by Design' initiative which involves testing and approving security devices and much more to see wether they meet the approved standard.
Yale join the 'Secure by Design scheme' No doubt payiing many thousand of pounds to do so as the Officer I spoke to said your entry fee depends on your organisations size (In the same breath he also claimed not to be trying to make money).
So Yale have approved products and they put the schemes logo on their packaging.

So i buy in the safes and offer them to clients but stupidly I am unable to advertise the fact that these safes have been tested and approved by the police even though Yale have paid for the privilege already.
Basically one wonders why Yale even bothered to join the scheme when their outlets aren't allowed to mention their credentials.

Yes I used the logo on my website but not as an attempt to steal the logo for my own use but just to clarify the safes I had sourced from Yale had met the stringent standards.

As mentioned I have now designed my own logo which says everything the other logo said but now I don't have to fork out £2000.

What really annoyed me about the whole saga was the letter threatening further action or being reported to trading standards.

I see they only solve 25% of crimes so perhaps well intentioned individuals like me are easy targets for those pen pushing quango rats.

Now you say that I can see where the issue is; They seem to be suggesting that you are claiming to be 'Police' approved, whereas, in reality, it's the product that is passed, and that you are misleading in your advertising, by suggesting that it's you that has approval.

Even so, the safes aren't 'Police' passed. They are passed to BSI standards. I've done quite a bit of work on safes in the past, never seen Police approved. Its like saying a car alarm is police approved, it's not, its Thatcham approved. The police are independent, and can't be seen to support or sponser any initiative.

 

[yaleguy3]

Now you say that I can see where the issue is; They seem to be suggesting that you are claiming to be 'Police' approved, whereas, in reality, it's the product that is passed, and that you are misleading in your advertising, by suggesting that it's you that has approval.

Even so, the safes aren't 'Police' passed. They are passed to BSI standards. I've done quite a bit of work on safes in the past, never seen Police approved. Its like saying a car alarm is police approved, it's not, its Thatcham approved. The police are independent, and can't be seen to support or sponser any initiative.

Not quite right on both accounts I'm afraid.

The way the logo's were used it was clear they related specifically to the items that were approved.
The 'Secure by Design' initiative is run by ACPO LTD which is the Association of Chief Police Officers , while that may make you think it is a Police organisation it is not it is actually a private ltd company. However their vacancies are filled by serving police officers so there seems to be a huge conflict of interests here.
The 'Secure by Design' organisation vet the design of building developments and manufacturers products and if they pass scrutiny they are allowed to use the 'secure by design logo' in the promotion of that product providing they pay membership to the scheme. Even if a product passes the testing it cannot be advertised as such without the company joining the scheme.
Its a right little money spinner.
The Scheme itself describes itself as an 'Official Police Initiative' so it is
indeed the Police Officially endorsing a private company but one that they themselves can make money from.
Not very ethical is it?
Anyway here's the logo I created quickly to replace the SBD ones.
Obviously the placement on my website is very careful to ensure they relate only to items that are approved by the SBD scheme otherwise I could fall foul of trading standard laws rather than just copyright issues.

 

[Mickymoody]

Now you say that I can see where the issue is; They seem to be suggesting that you are claiming to be 'Police' approved, whereas, in reality, it's the product that is passed, and that you are misleading in your advertising, by suggesting that it's you that has approval.

Even so, the safes aren't 'Police' passed. They are passed to BSI standards. I've done quite a bit of work on safes in the past, never seen Police approved. Its like saying a car alarm is police approved, it's not, its Thatcham approved. The police are independent, and can't be seen to support or sponser any initiative.

Not quite right on both accounts I'm afraid.

The way the logo's were used it was clear they related specifically to the items that were approved.
The 'Secure by Design' initiative is run by ACPO LTD which is the Association of Chief Police Officers , while that may make you think it is a Police organisation it is not it is actually a private ltd company. However their vacancies are filled by serving police officers so there seems to be a huge conflict of interests here.
The 'Secure by Design' organisation vet the design of building developments and manufacturers products and if they pass scrutiny they are allowed to use the 'secure by design logo' in the promotion of that product providing they pay membership to the scheme. Even if a product passes the testing it cannot be advertised as such without the company joining the scheme.
Its a right little money spinner.
The Scheme itself describes itself as an 'Official Police Initiative' so it is
indeed the Police Officially endorsing a private company but one that they themselves can make money from.
Not very ethical is it?
Anyway here's the logo I created quickly to replace the SBD ones.
Obviously the placement on my website is very careful to ensure they relate only to items that are approved by the SBD scheme otherwise I could fall foul of trading standard laws rather than just copyright issues.

You say I'm not right on both accounts, then describe to me exactly what I just said? So how not right? And you don't even mention BSI standards. Don't bother to reply, as you are obviously very confused about standards, and what you can and cannot copyright.