• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Could Old Train Company Names Be Re-Used?

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

whhistle

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
2,636
With the West Midlands area being the most recent to change name, if it's been long enough (how long?), could old names be re-used? Thinking Central Trains, Midland Mainline, even LMS or whatever?

I assume yes, as is the case with GWR, but if so, why don't companies do it a bit more often?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

C

Cavan

Member
Joined
7 Jan 2017
Messages
278
Some old br names are owned by the dft so they would have to approve useage.
 
C

cuccir

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
3,695
Presumably many of these names are owned by various entities - many classic names by the Department for Transport as Cavan notes, but it wouldn't surprise me if (say) First retained ownership over 'North Western' or Arriva 'Northern Spirit', to protect their own record and brand.
 
pdeaves

pdeaves

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
5,932
Location
Gateway to the South West
greatkingrat said:
The companies that used to run franchises often still legally exist, even if they are now dormant companies, so the names will be owned by the relevant parent group.

eg
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03007938 (Central Trains Ltd)
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03007934 (Midland Main Line Ltd)
Click to expand...

Of course, it is possible to have one legal name and another trading name (see First Greater Western Ltd as a current example, trading as Great Western Railway). "Great Western Railway Ltd" exists as a separate unrelated company (incorporated in 1983, according to https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01759457).
 
185

185

On Moderation
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
5,709
cuccir said:
Presumably many of these names are owned by various entities - many classic names by the Department for Transport as Cavan notes, but it wouldn't surprise me if (say) First retained ownership over 'North Western' or Arriva 'Northern Spirit', to protect their own record and brand.
Click to expand...

Quite why anyone would want to retain First North Western does astound me. 91mph with a hole in the cab floor is my clearest memory of them.

Northern Spirit in fairness brought about the start of improvements for the Transpennine route, refitting the 158s out.
 
duffield

duffield

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2013
Messages
3,288
Location
East Midlands
I assume that the companies owning the dormant brand names would be open to reasonable offers. The dormant brands are effectively worthless unless someone wants them.
The trick would be to convince the seller that the buyer had a number of prospective names in mind and would only buy the dormant brand if it was pretty cheap.
But I did have a feeling that trademarks can maybe eventually be challenged/invalidated if they are not used for any product. Don't know if this is correct.

After some quick research:
Yes, I was correct. If a trade mark is not used for a continuous period of 5 years, it can be challenged and my reading is that it will be revoked unless the trademark holder can show it was actually used commercially during that period.
See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trade-marks-revocation/revocation-non-use-proceedings

So "Midland Mainline" could potentially be challenged and then trademarked by another company with the only cost being the cost of the challenge, and if the owner of "midland Mainline" tried unsucessfully to defend the revocation costs could be awarded against it.

As far as the references to the DfT potentially owning certain trademarks, maybe different rules apply to government bodies (although I've seen no evidence of this).
 
T

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
I think as well it depends on how unique the name is as Northern Rail (often shortened to Northern) sounds very much like the current operator Northern but the term Northern isn't very original or unique.
 
D

dubscottie

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2010
Messages
1,013
Old names are usually owned by someone. For example I read that Sea Containers owned the Southern Railway name and had to pay a token sum to someone for Great North Eastern Railway.

Initials mean little. For example I could register the London and North Essex Railway name and stick LNER on the side of the trains and nobody could do anything unless the letters LNER are trademarked.

You get cases like Great Central (Loughborough) and Caledonian Railway (Brechin) as the original GCR and CR names are owned by someone else.
 
MG11

MG11

Member
Joined
4 Nov 2017
Messages
638
I'm not fond of naming train companies after the area they base themselves in. It seems wrong to me to name a service after an area when the trains are mobile, so will pass through many areas. It could also, in the customer's unknowledgable eye, suggest that the train company favours passengers travelling from a certain station. If someone regularly travels from King's Cross to Hull on Hull Trains, for example, they may wonder why it's called Hull Trains and not London Trains or Peterborough Trains even. Virgin Trains have the right idea, a neutral name that doesn't favour a particular city or region.
Another issue is with locally named companies, many passengers get similar names confused. I.e. East Midlands Trains regularly received Tweets on behalf of the former London Midland, and I would imagine similar mistakes are made with Southern/South Eastern.

I notice the OP mentioned Midland Mainline, well that name made sense, given that the majority of stations served were on the Midland Main Line. Even if that branding wasn't trademarked, it would be wrong to reinstate that name, as the franchise now also operates services from Peterborough-Doncaster, not even touching the Midland Mainline!
 
A

AndyW33

Member
Joined
12 Aug 2013
Messages
541
dubscottie said:
Old names are usually owned by someone. For example I read that Sea Containers owned the Southern Railway name and had to pay a token sum to someone for Great North Eastern Railway.

Initials mean little. For example I could register the London and North Essex Railway name and stick LNER on the side of the trains and nobody could do anything unless the letters LNER are trademarked.

You get cases like Great Central (Loughborough) and Caledonian Railway (Brechin) as the original GCR and CR names are owned by someone else.
Click to expand...
In fact the heritage Great Central based at Loughborough has the company name Great Central Railway plc. No brackets required.
 
W

whhistle

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
2,636
I also wonder how much could be resurrected...

Taking the Connex example, could someone, in theory buy the rights to the name, then start to tun a train franchise, and re-paint the trains into the Connex colours, even using the same logo?
 
C

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,821
MG11 said:
If someone regularly travels from King's Cross to Hull on Hull Trains, for example, they may wonder why it's called Hull Trains and not London Trains or Peterborough Trains even. Virgin Trains have the right idea, a neutral name that doesn't favour a particular city or region.
Click to expand...

That's a bizzare example as people would be well aware why it is called Hull Trains as that's its destination/starting point and other stations are just supplemental.

Virgin is ONLY called that due to the Virgin brand being what it is and no other reason.
 
AlexNL

AlexNL

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
1,718
whhistle said:
could someone, in theory buy the rights to the name, then start to tun a train franchise, and re-paint the trains into the Connex colours, even using the same logo?
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure you will run into some trademark and/or design registrations by then.

However, it seems that the Fyra trademark has expired so if you want to use a poisoned name... why not take that? :D
 
H

HowardGWR

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
4,981
pdeaves said:
Of course, it is possible to have one legal name and another trading name (see First Greater Western Ltd as a current example, trading as Great Western Railway). "Great Western Railway Ltd" exists as a separate unrelated company (incorporated in 1983, according to https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01759457).
Click to expand...
Looks like someone did that in the hope that someone else in the future would cross their palm with silver for it! :D
 
C

cjmillsnun

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2011
Messages
3,275
whhistle said:
I also wonder how much could be resurrected...

Taking the Connex example, could someone, in theory buy the rights to the name, then start to tun a train franchise, and re-paint the trains into the Connex colours, even using the same logo?
Click to expand...

They could in theory but Veolia would never sell the rights to the name or the logo.

Central Trains wasn't ever National Express Central Trains and therefore someone could trade as Central Trains (with their own logo) and a different company name.
 
F

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
9,784
Location
Central Belt
cjmillsnun said:
They could in theory but Veolia would never sell the rights to the name or the logo.

Central Trains wasn't ever National Express Central Trains and therefore someone could trade as Central Trains (with their own logo) and a different company name.
Click to expand...
Not sure if anyone would want to use it. Central trains was fairly toxic outside Birmingham.
 
dk1

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
19,874
Location
East Anglia
Anglia Railways would've been perfect for 'one' NXEA & AGA/GA but was never going to happen.
 
H

HowardGWR

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
4,981
The trouble with using 'Railway' instead of 'Trains' is that it makes it even less likely that pax will blame Network Rail for their shortcomings. Example - SWR instead of SWT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top