In the Court of the Lord Lyon

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I am sure they did.

The reason for my surprise was how long it took before somebody complained in the first place considering how many thousands must have seen the offending heraldry over 50 years.

If ignorance of the Law is no excuse are they not all accessories after the fact?

I think the football club sells their "accessories after the fact" on their on-line shop.

I hope they are filing VAT returns....

[Downunder Kilt]

You are spot on there MOR, all it takes is for one person the think that someone is getting more than they are, or getting some kind of advantage that they are not getting, and if there is some avenue of complaint, a complaint will be made. In another life I was a Tax Inspector and those type of complaints were all our section dealt with.

[Jerry]

I don't know the laws involved, but would the emblem still be considered a "Coat of Arms" if the shape of the shield was changed, say to round, or maybe diamond shaped instead of the accepted shield shape for arms?

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I don't know the laws involved, but would the emblem still be considered a "Coat of Arms" if the shape of the shield was changed, say to round, or maybe diamond shaped instead of the accepted shield shape for arms?

Yes, and for two reasons.

Firstly arms are depicted on a variety of shapes besides the standard "heater" or "flat iron" shield-shape, and that includes circles and diamonds (the last usually associated with the arms of a lady).

Secondly, any design contained within a line (think edge of shield, circle, etc.), that when looked at by an ordinary person gives the impression of being "a coat of arms", would fall within the jurisdiction of the competent heraldic authority, in this case the Court of the Lord Lyon.

Looking closer at the second point, the actual test would probably be whether or not the design could be blazoned; that is can it be described in the medieval French used to explain the number, sizes, colours, locations, and attitudes of the various charges (things) that appear within the defining line of the arms?

Broadly speaking the only exception to the second point mentioned might be the use of initials, or whole words, on a shield-shaped background, as oft time used by schools in place of actual arms.

[Bugbear]

Would the use of a shield with symbols, not necessarily the arms of some one else, by an organization be frowned upon by heralds and Lord Lyon?

I am thinking of a youth group I belonged to, as a child, that used a colored shield with a couple of symbols to represent itself; it was intended to look like heraldry to the children.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Would the use of a shield with symbols, not necessarily the arms of some one else, by an organization be frowned upon by heralds and Lord Lyon?

I am thinking of a youth group I belonged to, as a child, that used a colored shield with a couple of symbols to represent itself; it was intended to look like heraldry to the children.

Again the answer is probably yes. Schools often create a "coat of arms" with various symbols-- an open book, a scholars lamp, or a torch of knowledge-- that can run afoul of heraldic regulations. This is especially true if the intent was to look like a coat of arms.

Now with the above in mind, it has to be said that an offense is committed only if it occurs within the jurisdiction of the Lyon Court. Outside of this jurisdiction the flagrant flouting of the act of 1672 merely results in a pleasant, or not-so-pleasant, design being used in public.

[Bugbear]

Thank you. I seem to remember it even being depicted in a fancy looking circle.

Perhaps it is an offense, just not a legal offense. I don't know if this group extends to Scotland; doubt it. I have had no connection to them for many years now.

I'll put this in the category of teaching that fairy tales and myth are actual history, something that also went on.

[Bob C]

Outside of this jurisdiction the flagrant flaunting of the act of 1672 merely results in a pleasant, or not-so-pleasant, design being used in public.

The correct word is "flouting."

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

The correct word is "flouting."

...so much for voice recognition software.