Maybe someone can enlighten me since I was living in Houston since 1988 till 2005, but what was going on before Lew. I am trying to imagine a KU basketball game not sold out. I am a born and raised Lawrencian and began going to basketball games when I was 4 years old till I moved to Houston. I don't recall any games where the seats weren't filled.

Sure I have resentment with Lew since I have to watch my 90 year old father watch games from his TV set instead of having his tickets that he had since Allen Field House was built. Where was Jayhawk sports before Lew?, with exception to all the money he brings in (and KU turns around and pays him a few million.)

I liked what Dolph had to say a couple of weeks ago regarding the points system and the free rides for employees and their spouses.

Yeah, this nag been dead a long time and the flies are swarming.

Lot of whining about big bad KU. I'm not saying KU is perfect---have some complaints myself---but where would this town be without it?

all this fuss over a t shirt, which ends up being a rag to clean the car with, wax the car, scrub a floor, throw into a dumpster, clean the toilet stool and floor with, can't tell you how many KU shirts end up in dumpsters when students leave town, it's just a shirt and all this fuss

how important will the shirt be when the team loses, they will and the next athletic director will have to take up a new cause, I often wonder why Lew isn't wearing a KU shirt when he is around town, instead of the fancy suit

the Athletic Department got a lot of publicity over Joe College and for that KU should have been grateful.

oh well, those shirts do make mighty fine rags to refinish furniture with too, got some fine ones from the dumpster at Penn House a couple of years ago,even that place throws out old clothes

I find it really amusing that we are arguing what the law should be and not what it is. I agree with a lot of this column, but I'm glad Joe College is finished. And I bought a couple of t-shirts there. They broke the law and did it again and again. If you want to stay in business, you have to be flexible. They did not change their tactics.

Did Joe College ever e-mail KU with the lines on their shirts? Pretty easy to do. It's not they like they had to ask permission, but with $600,000 in legal fees on the line, I'd do it. He could have cooperated and worked with the university. He did not and he got what he deserved.

I also believe Lew Perkins will get what he deserves. This ticket investigation could be his downfall, but remember he would have to resign and not be fired. There is no way KU can afford to pay out Perkins, but I didn't think they could pay out Mangino either.

If the season ticket holders don't renew and also stop giving to the university, then he will feel the backlash. But, more important, if KU's football declines and the basketball team suffer another flameout, then the heat will be on Perkins for sure. Regardless, I will not root against KU just to see Perkins go down. I am a Jayhawk fan through thick and thin.

The standard for trademark infringement is "likelihood of confusion", which is obviously a very subjective (often arbitrary) conclusion.

I tell my clients that litigation is like a poker game - for the most part, the strength of your hand (i.e., your case) is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether you can pay (your attorney's fees) to stay in the game. Bigger businesses frequently use the legal system to harass little businesses, not because they have good cases but because the little businesses simply can't afford a prolonged fight. Unlike most clients, Joe College was apparently willing and able to do so, but lost in the end. Standing up for principles, while personally satisfying, is generally not good for business.

As for public policy, its never been clear to me why a public entity (e.g., KU) can own intellectual property and enforce it against the very public that paid for its development with tax money. For an interesting case, see Vitamin Technologists, Inc. v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, 64 USPQ 285 (9th Cir. 1945).

Go back and look at the first court ruling and the most current one, its changed 4 times before any results were "final"

The judge for this trial is also a KU grad, I find it hard to believe there was no conflict of interest in this case. KU Law Alumni Board of Governors The Hon. Julie A. Robinson, L'81 Judge, United States District Court Topeka, KS http://www.law.ku.edu/alumni/board/bylaws.shtml

I have to agree with hail2oldku.

I do see your point Mr. Hoeflich but I just can't get past the fact that Sinks knew what he was doing and he continued anyway. Plus, one should add in the fact that the courts agreed with KU.

Once more, and I'll type slowly so maybe you will understand, Larry had more than one opportunity to avoid even going to court. If he takes one of those opportunities, KU doesn't hire high priced lawyers to represent them. Larry pays a fee like all of the other t-shirt vendors in town and stays in business.

If KU didn't protect their brand with Larry, they would have lost their right to do so with every other vendor out there. Personally, I would hire the best attorney I could afford so I am not surprised that KU chose to do that as well. Maybe Larry should have spent a little more on his own lawyer and he would have received the advice to pay the licensing fee to the university.

"To those of you who think I am either naive or an idiot"

Those are everywhere, and it's easier to just let it slide, I imagine. For my part, I agree with your assessment of the bizarre nature of the jury's judgment. My theory on the variation between shirts (which I haven't gone back to details on the case to support or contradict) is that rather than deciding on infringement, they were deciding on tastelessness or what might harm the image of the university, which is an arbitrary thing subject to personal judgment.

It also misses the boat. All of the shirts were designed to mimic, and therefore infringe, on KU's brand. There was no point, I opine, to picking which shirt did and which did not, they were all pretty much equally guilty in that regards.

For the legal fees, did that come from the recommendation of KU or solely from the judgment of the judge?

I blame Sinks. There is no doubt that he broke the law. He lost his fight in a courtroom and now he has to pay.

He very easily could have avoided all of this early on.

KU would have been negligent had they not protected their trademark and the vendors that were legally selling their licensed products.

I agree with Professor Hoeflich.

KU Athletics behaved in a way that was neither reasonable nor neighborly.

"I keep seeing people posting that KU was fighting for their image. KU was fighting over the color blue and using Kansas or Hawks on shirts. Joe College never used Jayhawks, never printed a Jayhawk, etc.... I would side with KU if he had, but all he did was come up with some funny *ss shirts."

Leaving the opinion of how funny the shirts were, they were clearly designed to emulate and mimic official KU gear. As far as I'm concerned, what this fight was really about was KU not wanting anybody to mistake that they gave official endorsement to items that were, in my opinion and I imagine in theirs, pretty classless and potentially offensive.

@gatekeeper - "Joe College never used Jayhawks, never printed a Jayhawk, etc.... I would side with KU if he had, but all he did was come up with some funny *ss shirts. "

Get ready to side with KU...

"In July 2008, a jury agreed with KU but only on 53 designs, just over a fourth of those in question. Some of the T-shirt problems were clear: use of the Jayhawk emblem or the word “Jayhawk.”"

The source of that info.? The March 30, 2010, LJW editorial. Sinks used Jayhawks, both the logo and the word. He had to have known this was a violation and he did it anyway.

@hoeflich - I appreciate the response and share the belief that not every dispute has to go to court, but Sinks' intransigence clearly left KU with no other option. You can't be "neighborly" with someone who is going to brazenly flout the law.

But virtually no one who has followed the case believes that the jury’s verdict was anything other than bizarre in its findings.

Count me as a virtual no one. He used something that didn't belong to him to make money. He knew it, as did everyone else. Joe College t-shirts, done. Dead horse, lives on and on and on.

If you feel genetically obligated to buy in some fashion KU gear, make sure it hasn't the new font, an absolute marker of cash being filtered by Kansas Athletics, Inc.

By the way, are they assistant AD's or vice-presidents? They change and obfuscate the language so fast, it's hard to tell whether they're church or state or some new hybrid designed to avoid all accountability.

hoeflich (anonymous) says…

Phillbert & Pilgrim2: As I tried to say in my column (perhaps, inadequately), I do believe in the rule of law and I do accept that Joe College was found to have violated KU's trademarks, but people do not always have to bring litigation nor do they have to insist on being granted extremely large attorneys' fees.

And how do we know Larry didn't get a polite but strongly-worded letter from the KUA attorney asking that he cease and desist prior to the litigation being filed? Seems I remember something to that effect coming out of the trial. Sinks had his chance and thumbed his nose at it. He got what he deserved.

"While I am perfectly comfortable in saying that KU and Kansas Athletics have a right to protect their intellectual property and trademarks"

And that says it all... Joe College was the one who decided to take on this fight rather than negotiate it early on... Intellectual property and trademarks are protected items and any organization that does not defend those risks losing their protection. Why do you think that Home Depot took on The Old Home Depot... If you don't defend it, you lose it.

This LTE addresses just the tip of the iceberg. There's much more that has been going on for years. Several things have been mentioned above, so I won't reiterate.

But you forgot to include: Canceling the Band Day parade because of TV. Now that it's been done once it will happen again and again. This is detrimental to many small businesses downtown for whom Band Day is (was) a major income day. Charging the city $5K (give or take) because Perkins, Inc "was forced to cancel" a celebratory dinner at the Holidome for the last national champion BBall team. Divorcing KU from participating in any activities that support Lawrence. It used to be "Town and Gown." It now seems like it's "Gown and F* the Town." Not letting LHS & Freestate play against each other in Memorial Stadium because "it would destroy the sanctity of the stadium. Can anyone else add anything?

I'll grant that Perkins, Inc built the KU Athletic Corporation into a big money machine. However, this was done by trampling on any relationships between KU and Lawrence.

wrong.

KU, LMH, and Doug Compton, own Lawrence.

There was always significant gray area regarding these shirts. I believe KUAC's claim was that all shirts broke the law. As Puddleglum pointed out above, only about 40% of the shirts were found to infringe upon the trademark. KUAC was overreached.

On top of that, the jury's decision seems nonsensical and arbitrary. Again, as Puddleglum mentioned... "and some of these findings go beyond explicable: kansas volleyball team is okay kansas swim team is not okay....our coach is phat is bad, but our coach can eat your coach isn't?" The limits the court established are extremely blurry.

This obviously wasn't an open and shut case. Saying that "he knew he broke the law, and got hit with the bill when he tried to fight it" obscures the facts of the case and ignores the confusion that even the court evinced in its decision.

hoeflich (anonymous) says… Phillbert & Pilgrim2: As I tried to say in my column (perhaps, inadequately), I do believe in the rule of law and I do accept that Joe College was found to have violated KU's trademarks, but people do not always have to bring litigation nor do they have to insist on being granted extremely large attorneys' fees.

Larry was given plenty of opportunities to settle before going to court and simply paying the licensing fee that many other t-shirt manufacturers in town already pay. If KUA Inc had let him slide, then all of the other companies in town producing t-shirts could have (would have?) stopped paying their fees as well. Why should Larry get a free pass? He could have saved a whole lot of money, and his business, but he let arrogance get in his way.

As for the longtime faithful fan losing their tickets. Nobody lost their right to purchase their tickets. They simply lost their prime seat locations which they were UNDER paying for for many years. I have no problem with the fact that I ended up moving from mid-court in the upper chair backs to a lower corner on a bench seat. I would prefer my old, nicer seat and had a chance to retain it by increasing my donation. I wasn't in a position to do so though so I took the best available to me. I got a good 10 years of sitting in those better seats for the same price as people sitting in the seats I'm in now, and the seats way up in the corners, etc. The points system really just created a realistic pricing tier system for the seats just like the majority of the arenas in the country.

The KU-MU game, I won't argue with you on that one. I will point out though that Lew & Co wasn't the first to try and move the game. They were just the group that was successful in getting it done. Alas, the money was finally right.

When this is all over, it would be nice to see Perkins fired. There is now way he did not know what was going on in his department. By ignoring it, he supported it, thus is as guilty as the underling that was doing the dirty deeds.

This may be a good thing for Lawrence, and Lawrences business community.

As I read this, Hoeflich's real point is that KUAD had the wherewithal to run up a large legal bill.

He fairly observes that it wasn't the "illegal" t-shirts that killed Joe College, it was KUAD's high priced attorneys and the judge's decision to make the defendant foot their bill.

It would be interesting to contrast what KUAD spent on attorneys to what Joe College spent. If the amounts are in line, then this column missed its mark.

If KU Athletics is so unpopular, why do people continue to buy the merchandise, buy the tickets, and watch the games?

If you don't like what they are doing, you can always boycott their product.

phillbert & foxnewsPilgrim2: And I love it when a law professor goes with an argument based on "Sure, Joe College was found by a federal court to have broken the law, BUT..."

yeah, but Joe college was also found not breaking the law with over 60% of his shirts.

and some of these findings go beyond explicable: kansas volleyball team is okay kansas swim team is not okay....our coach is phat is bad, but our coach can eat your coach isn't? the court's decision was wrong in so many ways, they couldn't even explain it.

my guess is you two just like bullies....like fox news anchors. now go be mad at liberals and have a nice day.

Personally I am deeply offended by the obvious work of KU Athletics to not only destroy a local small business (who was paying rent and taxes to downtown), but as well a less obvious move to control KU Fans and Larryvillains' rights to free expression. A previous commentator was correct when s/he noted how KU Athletics is not only a false non-profit organization, but rather, a highly FOR profit group. They are controlling, they are bullies, they are only slightly different than the Mafia.

Perhaps the apparell Joe College was selling was occasionally offensive to some, but that also added to the college atmosphere of a college town. Let the kids wear what they want - only too soon will most of them will be forced into the same restrictive, expression-suppressing, business environments we all have succumbed to. A college town ought to have a festive, albeit occasionally off-color, atmosphere. It ought to be fun. Joe College added much to this. For crying out loud, it was little different than the kids of an earlier age stuffing daisies into the gun barrels of National Guardsmen during sit-ins and demonstrations.

Perhaps that's what this town needs - a few sit-ins and demonstrations by the younger crowd to get us old foagies to lighten up.

Bravo KU Athletics, bravo. What's next on your "hit list," day care centers who flagrantly use crimson and blue in their color schemes?

Many good points in the LTE but the headline fail is any sympathy for Joe College. The rules are simple to follow in collegiate licensing and honestly you get a number of chances to make mistakes before you are called on the carpet. The owner of Joe College lost his licenses on his prior business and proceeded to ignore the protocol in his most recent venture. How many times do you need to be told ?

That being said . it will be a good day when the current money grubbing administration is gone. The coaches have done a great job while the KUAC has been publicly taking credit. This act is getting old , quick.

Phillbert (anonymous) says…

And I love it when a law professor goes with an argument based on "Sure, Joe College was found by a federal court to have broken the law, BUT..."

Beat me to it.

So much for the rule of law, eh, Mike?

Worth repeating: • jkealing (Jonathan Kealing) says… bronze- I've warned you privately, now I'll warn you publicly. You do not have bearded_gnome's name correct. If you don't immediately cease to attempt to out an anonymous user, your account will be banned. In addition, I will immediately ban any account I suspect to be created by you without notice, warning or further cause. This is your final warning. Jonathan Kealing Online editor

––––– How has paulette2 lasted this long Jonathan?

Sounds like someone is mad that he doesn't get good seats anymore.

And I love it when a law professor goes with an argument based on "Sure, Joe College was found by a federal court to have broken the law, BUT..."

this kind of bullying does not happen only with KU Athletics.

look at the Ohio Street Scholarship Halls - with no really adequate parking that leveled a historic neighborhood.

and look at the Big Blue endorsement by the Provost's office of the Oread Hotel. all bullying by KU.

MIke - thanks once again for speaking from the 'heart' of Lawrence.

many of your columns from remembering Christmas spirit to your present LTE speak of what makes Lawrence, or at least part of our town great.

some of us like to live here because we believe that we can make a difference. thanks once again for another great letter.

Mike Hoeflich thank you for the excellent commentary.

Why should KU be able to do whatever the hell it wants?