Federal Court Rules Schools Can Protect Their Colors

Discussion in 'The Tiger's Den' started by CParso, Aug 1, 2006.

  1. CParso

    CParso Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,852
    Likes Received:
    368
    LINK:

    It will be interesting to see what this means for the future, specifically the purple & gold rebel flags.
     
  2. LSUDeek

    LSUDeek All That She Wants...

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,456
    Likes Received:
    151
    This is unconstitutional and should be appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
     
  3. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    It is most definately not unconstitutional. Schools have a right to protect their brand. The colors are a large part of that brand, and if a company is trying to make money by infringing on a schools brand then that company needs to pony up. The CLC exists for just that reason. Companies are perfectly free to make millions using colors and logos from universities, but they must get their product approved by the institution and the CLC.
     
  4. LSUDeek

    LSUDeek All That She Wants...

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,456
    Likes Received:
    151
    It most "definately" (im sick of you misspelling that word, get it right) is. How arbitrary is that? I can't manufacturer a ****ing purple and gold shirt without paying LSU?

    Give me a break. Unless it *says* LSU on it, I shouldn't have to pay.
     
  5. CParso

    CParso Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,852
    Likes Received:
    368
    It is a murky issue. I don't see how you can say definitely either way.
     
  6. LSUDeek

    LSUDeek All That She Wants...

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Messages:
    6,456
    Likes Received:
    151
    Here's where the problem comes in:

    I manufacture a red shirt that just happens to be close to the exact shade of crimson that Oklahoma uses. It has no OU, or even "Oklahoma" anywhere on it.

    OU can now sue the manufacturer because the color can be percieved as the the same as OU's "traditional, historic" colors.

    See the problem? It's arbitrary. Logos and phrases have been able to be trademarked for years now. But colors?
     
  7. SCTMO

    SCTMO Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think you're reading the ruling too broadly. The problem with the smack apparel merchandise is that they use school colors combined with phrases, facts, or names that lead a consumer to directly identify that merchandise with a university or professional sports team. The company benefits from the consumer's recognition of their school's colors AND additional identifying information without giving any compensation to the respective university. Therefore, I do not feel that a university has any say in apparel produced solely in school colors. Only if that apparel directly implicates a university connection.
     
  8. TigerWins

    TigerWins Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,666
    Likes Received:
    157
    Don't know if this was one of the shirts, but I don't see the problem with it. I'd like to see one of the shirts they are talking about.
    [​IMG]
     
  9. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    Exactly.

    Look at some of the Smack Apparel products. They are attempting to avoid trademark and copyright laws by not naming the school, but they use school phrases, coaches names, rivals names, and exact school colors. This will withstand a court challenge easily.
     
  10. Nutriaitch

    Nutriaitch Fear the Buoy

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    2,621
    LSU will be a tough one to enforce. Especially with Purple and Gold being used for Mardi Gras.
     

Share This Page