Archive for Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Jury to resume deliberations Thursday morning in KU’s trademark dispute with T-shirt maker
A federal lawsuit that pits KU against a Lawrence T-shirt company is in the hands of a jury tonight.
July 9, 2008, 1:05 p.m. Updated July 9, 2008, 6:39 p.m.
Advertisement
On the street
Do you think Joe-College.com’s T-shirt designs infringe upon the business trademark of Kansas University or harm the school’s image?
I would say no. I don’t see any Jayhawks or even any with KU on them. I live in Wichita and see plenty of shirts that are worse than those.
Topeka — A federal jury Wednesday started deliberations in Kansas University's lawsuit against Lawrence T-shirt seller Larry Sinks, whom school officials accuse of producing sometimes offensive T-shirts that look too much like official KU merchandise.
KU and its trademark enforcement arm Kansas Athletics Inc. allege Sinks' T-shirts infringe on KU's registered trademarks and harm the school's reputation.
KU has asked the eight-member jury to order Sinks to pay KU $509,000 - $476,000 in profits from the T-shirts and $33,000 in royalties - and to assess an unspecified amount in punitive damages against Sinks and Clark Orth, who operates a screen printing business that produces Sinks' shirts for sale at Joe-College.com, 734 Mass., and the company's Web site.
"KU's marks are strong and famous, and the defendants intentionally used those to make a buck," said Charlie Henn, an attorney representing KU.
But Sinks and his attorney, Jim Tilly, portrayed a different story.
Sinks said he went to great lengths to inform customers that his T-shirts were not official KU merchandise.
"We've done as much as I can think possible," Sinks said before U.S. District Court Judge Julie Robinson.
He said he has more than 200 signs in his shop informing customers that the shirts are not licensed by KU and that none of the money to purchase the shirts goes to KU.
Sinks said he was trying to establish a niche market that included T-shirts that KU would never approve, such a "Muck Fizzou" and "Our Coach Can Eat Your Coach."
Sinks' attorney said KU was trying to monopolize the marketplace so that everyone attending a KU event would be wearing official KU merchandise.
"Freedom in the marketplace is one of the great things that made this country great," Tilly said in urging the jury to reject KU's claims.
But Henn also argued that many of Sinks' T-shirts have tarnished the school's image because some believe the offending messages are sponsored or affiliated with KU. He cited the "Muck Fizzou" shirt as among those with "vile comments."
But Tilly said "Muck Fizzou" has been in the marketplace since 1982 and he didn't understand why it has become an issue for KU when Sinks was selling it.
The jury was given more than 60 specific instructions that took Judge Robinson more than an hour to read. In those instructions, it was noted that KU had registered trademarks on such words as Kansas, KU, Jayhawks, The Phogg, Allen Fieldhouse, Rock Chalk Jayhawk and others.
Afterward, KU associate athletics director Jim Marchiony said KU supported free speech but that Sinks' T-shirts "had crossed the line."
But Tilly said universities nationwide are filing similar court cases, trying to gain monopolies because the sale of merchandise has become extremely lucrative.
"This is a watershed case," he said.
Mark Fagan contributed information for this story.
9 July 2008
at 1:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
funkdog1 (Anonymous) says…
go larry!!!
9 July 2008
at 1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
Apparently KU owns the color blue and the word Kansas.
Or at least they think they do.
9 July 2008
at 1:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BigPrune (Anonymous) says…
Our coach can eat your coach.
Just ask John “Candy” Madden or Bill Parcells.
9 July 2008
at 2:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
packs_of_wild_dogzz (Anonymous) says…
Their shirts are way cooler and more affordable than anything the University offers.
9 July 2008
at 2:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Reaper2K (Anonymous) says…
“Muck Fizzou” infringes “on the business trademark of Kansas University”? How exactly is that? I'd love to hear their logic on that. I think KU is getting greedy because they didn't think up these great t-shirts first.
9 July 2008
at 2:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
MGoble (Matthew Goble) says…
I disagree with many of the shirts that Larry's store sells, but I believe in his right to sell them. Justice will prevail in this case.
9 July 2008
at 2:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Bone777 (Anonymous) says…
For one the few times this year….KU loses.
Larry, When this is over, KU should have you come speak on Capitalism.
9 July 2008
at 2:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
kujayhawk (Anonymous) says…
Isn't Lew great?
9 July 2008
at 2:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…
Keep fighting the good fight, Larry.
9 July 2008
at 2:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
oscarfactor (Anonymous) says…
When Larry wins, he should immediately come out with a new t-shirt:
“Joe College Can Eat Your Athletic Director”
9 July 2008
at 2:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
fleeba (Anonymous) says…
Isn't this considered freedom of speech?
If KU won this one, that would open the door to too many things.
What about the signs that people hold up at the games, will they sue over those as well???
9 July 2008
at 2:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Spring_2 (Anonymous) says…
This is completely ridiculous! KU is just pissy that Joe College is making money on their shirts. Sorry KU that everyone who wants to cheer on KU doesn't want to spend $30+ on a stupid t-shirt. Let's recall the Mass Street Bonanza, I am guessing 85% of people on Mass was supporting a Joe College shirt, because they are hilarious and anyone who walks in there can find a shirt to suit their mood for a particular game. I think it is simply stupid that KU is being such ––– about this. Get over it you make enough in tuition from every student that attends KU to let Joe College go on it's merry way to produce the best shirts in Lawrence. Rock Chalk Larry! Give the man a break he is just trying to make a living like everyone else.
9 July 2008
at 2:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
oscarfactor (Anonymous) says…
Or maybe:
“Joe College Just Ate Your University Legal Team”
9 July 2008
at 2:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Haiku_Cuckoo (Anonymous) says…
“KU officials say some of Sinks' shirts have offensive meanings that reflect poorly on KU.”
I agree with KU on this one. It's embarrassing to see KU fans on TV wearing shirts that say “i sh*t purple!” in big letters.
9 July 2008
at 2:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ONmySOAPbox (Anonymous) says…
I wonder if KU would sue a student group if they printed the same t-shirt to make money for an underfunded program that KU cut out of the budget?
9 July 2008
at 2:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
laika (Anonymous) says…
“I agree with KU on this one. It's embarrassing to see KU fans on TV wearing shirts that say “i sh*t purple!” in big letters.”
Perhaps it's embarrassing to you, but that isn't a legal argument as to how this store infringing on the Universities trademarks. Plus, I would assume that shirts message is protected speech.
9 July 2008
at 2:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
KU_Dude (Anonymous) says…
Should the people that use KU in their usernames pay the university for that right?
I hope I don't owe them any money.
9 July 2008
at 2:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
countrygirl (Anonymous) says…
You sh*t purple? Wow—you ought to have that checked out!
9 July 2008
at 2:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
classclown (Anonymous) says…
Haiku_Cuckoo (Anonymous) says:
“KU officials say some of Sinks' shirts have offensive meanings that reflect poorly on KU.”
I agree with KU on this one. It's embarrassing to see KU fans on TV wearing shirts that say “i sh*t purple!” in big letters.
========================
That's more a reflection on the typical KU fan than it is of Sink's t shirts. Don't blame him for the crassness of KU students and alumni. They are the ones that willfully choose to purchase and wear them.
9 July 2008
at 2:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says…
no one can own a color or letters. know wonder tuition cost so much! all the students are paying legal fees for this hilarious trial.
9 July 2008
at 2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says…
go joe college!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
9 July 2008
at 2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Haiku_Cuckoo (Anonymous) says…
“You sh*t purple? Wow-you ought to have that checked out!”
My thoughts exactly whenever I see an idiot wearing that shirt on TV. LOL!
9 July 2008
at 2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
consumer1 (Anonymous) says…
Good luck Larry
9 July 2008
at 2:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Haiku_Cuckoo (Anonymous) says…
“no one can own a color or letters.”
From Owens-Corning:
“The 'Owens Corning' logo, the color pink, cultured stone, and other trademarks identified with a ® in these documents are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Owens Corning Intellectual Capital.”
You read it right, “the color pink”.
9 July 2008
at 2:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
wysiwyg69 (Anonymous) says…
good luck Larry. I hope you win and then make a fortune off of their stupidity
9 July 2008
at 2:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Horace (Anonymous) says…
Judge Robinson is a pretty sharp lady. Hopefully the jury will rule in Lary's favor or he gets a jnov.
9 July 2008
at 3:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
rocksolid (Anonymous) says…
Remember the Home Depot vs. the Old Home Depot suit ?
I guess I could get these shirts confused as well(sarcasm) Should have trade marked” Party like its 1988” in March oh well missed the boat on that one. Congrats LJW finally get to read about this trial in Lawrence.
9 July 2008
at 3:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Haiku_Cuckoo (Anonymous) says…
“Perhaps it's embarrassing to you, but that isn't a legal argument as to how this store infringing on the Universities trademarks.”
I wasn't addressing the legal issue, but rather agreeing with KU's point that the shirts reflect poorly on KU.
9 July 2008
at 3:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
jackpot (Anonymous) says…
isn't K.U. a state college? So are we the tax payers footing the bill? This maybe is about the font used by Larry for the letter “K”. I can't think the color blue is the same. I think this started when Lew saw his first M.U. vs K.U. game. He saw all the “muck fizzou” shirts and found out “K.U.” got no money from the selling of the shirt. I just hope K.A.I. is not funded by my tax money. I hate to see the way Kansas can think of ways to waste tax money.
9 July 2008
at 3:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Bone777 (Anonymous) says…
“KU officials say some of Sinks' shirts have offensive meanings that reflect poorly on KU.”.
I am much more embarrassed by White Owl…
9 July 2008
at 3:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bad_dog (Anonymous) says…
Folks, here is what I believe this litigation is about:.
I've not read the pleadings, but under state law, KU could argue they are attempting to protect themselves against unfair competition, particularly where there is a specific interest to be protected such as customer “goodwill”. The law in this area is very unfriendly to attempts to: 1) Pass yourself off as another-e.g. “Dimple Donuts” rather than “Dunkin Donuts”, 2) Diluting, e.g. Minnie and Mickey in an adult movie, and 3) Misappropriation-taking something like a logo or identifying mark and using it as your own.
Under the concept of invasion of privacy the law also recognizes the right to the economic value of one's image. This concept is grounded in the law of privacy and unfair competition laws and is intended to protect identity against commercial exploitation. Keep in mind an identity can be defined to include your name or image, your voice, your nickname or any other thing by which an individual is recognized by others.
While as “laika” and “fleeba” noted above, some wording can be protected as “free” speech, don't disregard the fact there will likely be non-Jayhawks on the jury. How will they view such “free” speech?
Under Federal law, if dealing with trademarked materials the issue most likely arising here is that KU believes Joe College is infringing. The primary concern is whether Joe College's use of certain markings, colors, words, etc. are likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception as to the source or origin of the goods and services. Again, the goal is protecting the expectation of customers that particular goods and services come from an identified and expected source.
Who knows how the jury will rule? I certainly don't, but I doubt they will hear any evidence on or be instructed on the relative differences in wealth, whether KU would sue student groups or any factors other than the law.
9 July 2008
at 3:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
hail2oldku (Anonymous) says…
“jackpot (Anonymous) says:
I hate to see the way Kansas can think of ways to waste tax money.”
Yet, it's the fact that Larry refuses to pay a licensing fee to KU that is the basis of the lawsuit. So you all cheer the guy that is beating the system and screwing the university out of money that would be going to help keep tution down, but bitching about the cost of tuition and increased taxes, etc.
9 July 2008
at 3:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…
Correct me if I'm wrong, to the couple of lawyers/law students I know frequent this board, but couldn't an argument be made that these shirts are protected speech on the grounds of parody of a public figure/entity?
9 July 2008
at 3:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
JOEHAWK (Anonymous) says…
I think Larry has the right to sell them. Some of his shirts are very clever. There are other shirts that we should have more class than to wear.
I've always thought we were a classy school. Muck Fizzou was clever for about a minute, now it's just vulgar. I think Larry, fans, and students of KU could come up with something better to wear than that.
In my opinion, a t-shirt like that is something an MU graduate would wear, they don't have any class.
9 July 2008
at 3:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
misslawrence (Anonymous) says…
The whole Eastside of Lawrence is backing up Larry all tha way!!!!!!!! Get 'em Larry……I'm wearing my shirt right now!! the “ROY WHO” one…….
9 July 2008
at 3:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…
“Yet, it's the fact that Larry refuses to pay a licensing fee to KU that is the basis of the lawsuit.”
–––––-
He doesn't use KU any logos or trademarks on his shirts. There is nothing to license.
The best case that can be made as I see it is “diluting”. (see bad_dog's description).
Let me guess hail2oldku, you work there? I can't see anyone else making the claim that KU is getting “screwed out of it's money” with a straight face.
While KU may win this lawsuit based on the dilution claim, they are not losing money. Joe College and official KU licensed gear occupy completely different market segments. I would hazard a guess that there are two types of people who own Joe College shirts: 1) those who don't want to pay the $30 for an “official” shirt, and so would not buy a KU shirt even if Joe College didn't exist, and 2) those who like the alternative approach of the Joe College shirts and own one or more in addition to some official KU gear.
Either way, it's hard to make the case that Joe College is stealing KU's customers.
9 July 2008
at 3:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…
There can't be too much of an argument for dilution/trademark infringement… I can't find the link for it (post it, someone, if you can) but LJW ran a story a while back about how there are three or four high schools that use the jayhawk as a mascot, in nearly identical form, and I'd wager a guess that not a damn one of them is paying royalties for it.
9 July 2008
at 4 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
short_one (Anonymous) says…
hail2oldku: does trademark money go to KU tuition fund (general operating dollar) or to athletic dept? THe argument that trademark money goes to tuition would suggest that tuition should be going down based on the large number of KU shirts bought this year (Orange bowl and nat'l championship)…
9 July 2008
at 4:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
hail2oldku (Anonymous) says…
I have no affiliation with the university other than the diploma that hangs on my wall at home logic.
I believe we went through this exercise with the original thread, but in your #2 above you fail to address that if JC was licensed then Larry would be sending money to KU.
Don't get me wrong, I think some of his shirts are quite creative. Others are beyond crass though and as I did mention in the discussion on the earlier story there are people that I know who attended either the school to our east or the one to our west who have seen the shirts on the street and ask me how KU condones the sale of the shirts so there is a fairly obvious confusion being caused by Larry and that is where the trademark infringement comes into play.
I really couldn't care less which side wins this thing. Though if KU does win then jackpot won't have to worry about it costing the taxpayers because Larry will probably be hit with paying attorney's fees as well.
9 July 2008
at 4:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Haiku_Cuckoo (Anonymous) says…
there are three or four high schools that use the jayhawk as a mascot, in nearly identical form, and I'd wager a guess that not a damn one of them is paying royalties for it.
=========
You would lose that wager.
From the story:
“For the right to use the Jayhawk name or mascot, KU is compensated, said KU Associate Athletic Director Jim Marchiony.
The licensing fee is the nominal sum of $1 per year, he said.”
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/apr…
9 July 2008
at 4:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
fleeba (Anonymous) says…
Haiku_Cuckoo (Anonymous) says:
“no one can own a color or letters.”
From Owens-Corning:
“The 'Owens Corning' logo, the color pink, cultured stone, and other trademarks identified with a ® in these documents are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Owens Corning Intellectual Capital.”
You read it right, “the color pink”.
====================================
or.. how about this one:
Published by UPS Brand Management. © 2003 United Parcel Service of America, Inc.
UPS, the UPS brandmark and the color brown are registered trademarks of United Parcel Service of America, Inc. All rights
“The color Brown”
9 July 2008
at 4:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
hail2oldku (Anonymous) says…
short_one - I do not know if the licensing money goes into the general fund or if it goes into the scholarship fund. Either way it contributes, in a small way, towards tuition.
9 July 2008
at 4:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
fu7il3 (Anonymous) says…
There are definately some trademark issues going on. The shirts intentionally associate with KU. Any other trademark would create the same issues.
9 July 2008
at 4:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bad_dog (Anonymous) says…
I concur that dilution and infringement appear to be the strongest allegations KU can make.
I too have only a passing interest in this matter, however, don't forget that whether or not you like KU, or believe they are money grubbers keeping the “little man” down, they are the institution with the reputation and tradition that creates the market for such T-shirts. The marketabililty creates the value institutions seek to protect through licensing products.
Without the reputation and tradition of KU to draw upon Joe College would be relegated to places like Columbia, MO. Me? I'd rather pay the licensing fee… twice.
9 July 2008
at 4:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
MrMister (Anonymous) says…
Using the dilution argument posted above by bad_dog, I would believe that Mizzou, K-State, and Roy Williams would have more right to sue that KU does. The negative comments are directly aimed at them rather than just implied as the link to KU.
9 July 2008
at 4:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bniccole (Anonymous) says…
I think Lew Perkins is just a greedy man and that Larry Sinks has every right to sell the shirts without having to pay KU for it-he does not use their logo or name. I love the shirts-they are very unique and whenever I wear mine, even in other towns/states, I come across people that like them too and want to know where they come from(so I give them the website). Some people may think that a few are vulgar or not tasteful-then you don't need to buy those certain ones but just remember-there IS someone who does like it and who will wear it! I wish Larry the best of luck and I hope that KU and Lew Perkins end up having to pay for all of his court costs, attorney's fees, etc…
9 July 2008
at 4:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…
Anonymous user
Haiku_Cuckoo (Anonymous) says:
there are three or four high schools that use the jayhawk as a mascot, in nearly identical form, and I'd wager a guess that not a damn one of them is paying royalties for it.
=========
You would lose that wager.
From the story:
“For the right to use the Jayhawk name or mascot, KU is compensated, said KU Associate Athletic Director Jim Marchiony.
The licensing fee is the nominal sum of $1 per year, he said.”
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/apr…
=======================================
So, in other words, JC has grounds to argue that it too should pay only a $1/year licensing fee, or else has a claim that KU is discriminating against it? Sounds good to me… Larry, I'll even pay the dollar for you for 2008.
9 July 2008
at 4:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
d_prowess (Anonymous) says…
I am not at all close to being a lawyer, but is there any legal reason/benefit for KU to pursue this lawsuit? Will it help them in the future if another company comes along and tries to do the same thing by showing a precedent for fighting this type of thing?
I guess I am just wondering if they didn't try to stop Joe College, would that hurt them in a future case if someone was more blatant in their attempt to skirt paying a licensing fee.
Any lawyers out there that have some insight on this type of thing?
9 July 2008
at 4:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bad_dog (Anonymous) says…
I suspect that unless mizzzou or K-State have a licensed trademarked logo misappropriated or 'Ol Roy is defamed (don't forget-he's a “public figure” with less protection from “opinions”) by Joe College, they wouldn't have adequate basis for a lawsuit.
9 July 2008
at 4:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bad_dog (Anonymous) says…
So, in other words, JC has grounds to argue that it too should pay only a $1/year licensing fee, or else has a claim that KU is discriminating against it? Sounds good to me: Larry, I'll even pay the dollar for you for 2008.
No, this means KU has the right to set and collect any licensing fee the market will bear. There's no discrimination here. I believe the reason KU permits schools to use their logo is because they are schools and KU probably limits their usage dramatically, i.e on a non-profit basis. It may even constitute free advertising for KU.
Keep your dollar, you might need it.
9 July 2008
at 4:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
OldEnuf2BYurDad (Anonymous) says…
KU will lose, but those shirts are lewd and beneath us all.
“Their shirts are way cooler and more affordable than anything the University offers.”
WRONG. Muck Fizzou belongs IN Missouri.
9 July 2008
at 4:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
bad_dog (Anonymous) says…
d_prowess:
Yes, failing to protect your rights can constitute a waiver of your legal ability to protect them.
9 July 2008
at 4:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
california (Anonymous) says…
Larry Sinks is degrading KU and will lose this case. The Feds aren't stupid—they don't sue if they don't believe they can win. Larry has never been what I would deem a “reputable” businessman. He's going down is my bet
9 July 2008
at 4:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…
I stand by my contention that these shirts constitute parodies of a public institution and as such will be protected on free-speech grounds.
9 July 2008
at 4:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“Yes, failing to protect your rights can constitute a waiver of your legal ability to protect them.”
But “protecting” a right that you don't have won't do anything to protect rights you do have.
9 July 2008
at 4:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
kujayhawk (Anonymous) says…
Can Lew sue me for using trajon font in an e-mail? Good god, I hope he doesn't sue me for my username.
9 July 2008
at 5:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
california (Anonymous) says…
Clarification: MOST Federal juries don't include folks that are stupid. KU wouldn't sue if they didn't think they had a strong case and could win. You never know with a jury trial…
9 July 2008
at 5:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“KU wouldn't sue if they didn't think they had a strong case and could win.”
More likely, they think know can afford better lawyers for a longer time, and eventually win a war of attrition against Sinks.
9 July 2008
at 5:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
missmagoo (Anonymous) says…
this is just stupid. go larry!
9 July 2008
at 5:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
classclown (Anonymous) says…
I find it interesting that a number of post refer to the wearing of the “Muck Fizzou” shirts as being low class and making statements as “That belongs in Missouri” and “That's something a Missouri grad would wear, not KU because KU has class”.
Yet it's not the Missouri people that are wearing them is it? It's the KU people. You know, the supposedly classy ones.
And before someone makes a lame response about me being a Missouri fan or something, I am not. In fact, I don't care for college sports at all.
Here's hoping Joe College wins.
9 July 2008
at 5:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
babyj10 (Anonymous) says…
1) If Sinks argues that there is no confusion, then why does he need signs up that say he's not licensed? Obviously, there would be confusion otherwise.
2) The reason their shirts are cheaper are because they don't pay royalties.
3) Why should they be able to get away with selling shirts with the player's names on them (i.e. “Get it on with Sherron”) when it is illegal (per NCAA rules) for everyone else?
Joe College is a disgrace and they're not just harming KU; they're taking profits away from small shops like Jock's Nitch, Sports Dome, Jayhawk Bookstore, etc. I wish all the KU fans were classy enough not to buy such tasteless shirts.
9 July 2008
at 5:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
california (Anonymous) says…
“More likely, they think know can afford better lawyers for a longer time, and eventually win a war of attrition against Sinks.”
—Great point. It still spells a win for KU. Also, I thought that Babyj10 had a great point (#1 above).
9 July 2008
at 6:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
california (Anonymous) says…
Whoever hasn't looked at Joe College website should; it may change your oulook:
http://www.joe-college.com/catalog/
Looks like Larry has his hands full. Shirts with slogans such as “Rock Chalk Baby”…, “Kansas—The birthplace of North Carolina Basketball,” “Basketball U—Est. 1898, Lawrence, Kansas” are going to be hard to defend. And throw in the “Don't be Confused” link regarding not being licensed as well as 200 signs (200 SIGNS????) in his shop stating they aren't licensed, etc. and Larry knows he was/is skating on thin ice. But, that's Larry for ya.
9 July 2008
at 6:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Jay_Z (Anonymous) says…
Go Larry!
9 July 2008
at 6:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
rocksolid (Anonymous) says…
Was that Sherron shirt made after the elevator encounter?
9 July 2008
at 6:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
notnowdear (Anonymous) says…
KU get public funds from the state of Kansas,more so than any other Kansas college, so the Jayhawk should be public property, to be used by whoever Kansan wants to, for whatever reason that Kansan wants to, as long as that Kansan pays Kansas taxes.
I side with the shirt maker on this one.
KU, end the unnecessary hubris now! OR function without public funds.
9 July 2008
at 7:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
notnowdear (Anonymous) says…
It is a good thing I am not a juror. KU would lose.
funny, I only get called for jury duty at the Federal level.
9 July 2008
at 7:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
KUHOOPS (Anonymous) says…
There obviously is some degree of trademark infrigement here, as he admittedly is marketing these off of KU athletics. However, free speech may win out here. Tough call, although, the feds wouldn't have tried this case if they weren't going to win.
9 July 2008
at 7:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
KUHOOPS (Anonymous) says…
What's next Lew, are you going to ask that the letters “k” and “u” not appear consecutively without official licensing?
9 July 2008
at 7:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Multidisciplinary (Anonymous) says…
“Joe College is a disgrace and they're not just harming KU; they're taking profits away from small shops like Jock's Nitch, Sports Dome, Jayhawk Bookstore, etc. I wish all the KU fans were classy enough not to buy such tasteless shirts.”
-babyj10
–
I don't mean to say I love their work, but I think most people buying those shirts are either there 'because' they want a 'dis' shirt, or because they happen to get a laugh out of one they see.
I don't see this as an: I'm going downtown to look around and see if I find a new shirt, and then Joe's wins.
When fans want a “team” shirt, they want a team shirt..not a screwball one.
This isn't a food court.
When someone wants steak, they go to a steak place. When they want pizza, they go for that.
–-
Note. If KU doesn't like 'bad' items..why did they have official jayhawk “bloody red bird poop” items for sale?
The first time I saw those I was shocked.
9 July 2008
at 8:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Silly_me (Anonymous) says…
I'll be the first to admit I'm not a lawyer, but I've consulted with lawyers on intellectual property issues as they pertain in the technical field..I answer technical questions as lawyers are formulating their case to make sure they have a good understanding of the state of the industry.
I talked about this case to one of the lawyers I work with and he told me that KU may also be concerned regarding precedent. If KU doesn't do anything about Larry's business, which is borderline associating a product with KU, then they potentially allow a precedent to be set for somebody else to push the line a bit further. Companies or entities that have a strong brand image have to be very diligent about this or they could end up losing the exclusing right to their branding.
Personally, I think some of the t-shirts are a hoot, but they definately draw upon an association with KU..that is the rub here.
9 July 2008
at 8:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
jayharchitect (Anonymous) says…
Lawyers help me out… doesn't free speech in some ways go out the window when you are making profit from it?
9 July 2008
at 10:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…
jayharchitect, it can't completely go out the window when profit is involved, or you wouldn't have some of the sensationalist books and such floating around out there.
I think the ultimate determination will be that individuals have a right to parody public institutions and entities. For example, tshirthell.com has shirts clearly utilizing, at least as memory serves, the Skittles and Wal-mart logos, maybe a few others.
9 July 2008
at 10:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Gina (Gina Bailey-Carbaugh) says…
If KU wins, can they print shirts with “Sinks is SUNK”?
Sinks is profitting off of the blood, sweat and tears of the athletes. That makes him a leech.
A few of his shirts are funny, but the majority are crass and designed to insight outrage in others. In other words, he's a T-shirt shock-jock. And the result is the degredation of the athletes and the university.
I would rather invest in a licensed t-shirt that the cheap crap Sinks panders.
9 July 2008
at 10:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
hairshoptalk (Anonymous) says…
haiku_cuckoo,
so is it a shade of pink that they trademarked or the color pink in general? whats the owning benefit of o a color? do they get paid every time someone uses this color?
9 July 2008
at 10:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
VTHawk (Anonymous) says…
The color brown has become closely associated with UPS. The campaign “What can Brown do for you” is just one example. DHL can't just roll out brown DHL trucks and deliver packages. The jury will decide whether printing blue “Kansas” shirts infringes on KU's brand in a similar vein, to my understanding. Doesn't look good for Sinks.
Owens Corning's TM prevents other companies from producing pink-colored insulation. The pink color allows OC to differentiate its products from other brands of insulation.
10 July 2008
at 2:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
misslawrence (Anonymous) says…
K.U. is just pissed that it doesn't receive any “endowment” for their fund……and Pi*&ed that Larry is from the Eastside….and that “our” side of town keeps it real!!! just because they flanagle about 'getting money'