Get the latest NUFC transfer and takeover news straight to your inbox for FREE by signing up to our newsletter Subscribe Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

A fans collective has been forced to relaunch their alternative Toon shirt after legal threats from Newcastle United.

Trouble brewed earlier this year when the Magpie Brand unveiled their ‘anti-Wonga and Mike Ashley free’ black and white top with Magpie emblem and city of Newcastle upon Tyne crest.

Now the organisation, which is affiliated to the Newcastle United Supporters Trust, AshleyOut.Com, Mike Ashley Out Campaign, Gallowgate Shots, True Faith and THE MAG, has revealed its re-design after lengthy discussions with lawyers from Newcastle United over the use of the club’s intellectual property.

The new shirt still features the city crest but the magpie emblem has been removed while the group is now known as the Newcastle Fans Brand.

Already 3,300 shirts have been ordered and in July the initial run of the old design shirt sold out.

A spokesperson for the group said: “Clearly, we had no intention of misleading fans or posing as an official Newcastle United product.

“The fact is our shirt exists for precisely the opposite reason.

“We just want to reclaim the black and white stripes for the fans.

“And the fact that our first batch sold out in little over an hour proves that thousands of other Toon fans feel the same way.

“However, the fact remains that, as a not-for-profit initiative by ordinary Newcastle supporters, having sought pro bono legal advice from intellectual property experts we were faced with the stark choice: disband the Magpie Brand or re-brand and re-design our shirt.

“After some thought we decided that an alternative badge with the significance of the magpie could not be added without risking a similar response from the club, and so the rebranded shirt will simply feature the city crest from the city of Newcastle upon Tyne coat of arms.

“We’re disappointed about the forced removal of the magpie, but we can think of no stronger bond than between our club and the city, depicted by the city crest on a clean black and white shirt free of questionable sponsors.

“This remains a suitable protest against Newcastle United’s current regime.”

Read more:

An NUFC spokesperson said: “We are extremely disappointed with the tone being adopted by the Newcastle Fans Brand, which follows otherwise amicable and respectful conversations between both parties.

“We have engaged with the group over a number of weeks in an attempt to find a solution that would work for both sides and have raised no objections at any time to the sale of an alternative black and white shirt. Indeed, it was actually the club that suggested the ‘Newcastle Fans Brand’ name as a compromise, which the group was seemingly happy to accept.

“The club simply needs to protect its commercial rights. Since the initial dispute arose, which was due to clear trademark and copyright infringements, we have actively engaged with the group to find positive solutions for both sides.

“While making it very clear from the outset that we would only consider legal action as an absolute last resort, which we hoped would not be necessary, the club and its representatives have at no time issued intimidating correspondence.

“On several occasions the club’s representatives offered to meet with the group to find a positive solution for both parties but this was unfortunately declined.”

There had also been a copyright concern over the use of the city of Newcastle crest which is owned by Newcastle City Council.

But a council spokesman said: “The Council has been in dialogue with the group about their proposed Newcastle Fans Brand shirt. We don’t have any problem in principle with the City’s crest being used as part of the design, but we have made clear that we reserve the right to review the position if there are any changes in circumstances. This could include, for example, evidence that the sale of these shirts is part of a commercial operation or if we feel that the Council’s reputation is being adversely affected.”