bigmacbear (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
bigmacbear) wrote2006-01-31 09:25 pm
bigmacbear) wrote2006-01-31 09:25 pm
Entry tags:
Intellectual property
Seahawks ordered to stop using "12th Man"
After reading what others had to say about this on KING's blog, I wanted to post my comments here to see if I'm barking up the wrong tree.
Frankly, while I understand this action by Texas A&M is dictated by their legal position, it is extremely petty and ill-timed. They're being a major party-pooper, and therefore are the target of the anger -- justified or not -- of a million fans, myself included.
I went through a similar slow burn when a Rochester restaurant was forced to rename itself, re-do its menu from scratch, and redecorate because the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences asserted its trademark on the name of its award. The restaurant was clearly in the wrong, but when a large corporate trademark holder comes down like a ton of bricks on some relatively small business owner, it rankles.
On one level the current controversy is between two large and relatively well-funded organizations, but on another level it's between a large university and a whole lot of individuals. I suspect that while it is likely the Seahawks themselves will be forced to change a few things to comply with their demands, there is no way Texas A&M can expect to prevail against a million angry football fans as individuals -- and any attempt will be met with open defiance.
As well it should. Allowing a common phrase in the English language to be owned exclusively by one organization flies in the face of common sense and what most Americans believe is protected by the First Amendment.
Ah well, between this and George II pontificating, I think I've had quite enough bovine excrement to deal with this evening. I feel so much better getting it off my chest, so to speak.
After reading what others had to say about this on KING's blog, I wanted to post my comments here to see if I'm barking up the wrong tree.
Frankly, while I understand this action by Texas A&M is dictated by their legal position, it is extremely petty and ill-timed. They're being a major party-pooper, and therefore are the target of the anger -- justified or not -- of a million fans, myself included.
I went through a similar slow burn when a Rochester restaurant was forced to rename itself, re-do its menu from scratch, and redecorate because the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences asserted its trademark on the name of its award. The restaurant was clearly in the wrong, but when a large corporate trademark holder comes down like a ton of bricks on some relatively small business owner, it rankles.
On one level the current controversy is between two large and relatively well-funded organizations, but on another level it's between a large university and a whole lot of individuals. I suspect that while it is likely the Seahawks themselves will be forced to change a few things to comply with their demands, there is no way Texas A&M can expect to prevail against a million angry football fans as individuals -- and any attempt will be met with open defiance.
As well it should. Allowing a common phrase in the English language to be owned exclusively by one organization flies in the face of common sense and what most Americans believe is protected by the First Amendment.
Ah well, between this and George II pontificating, I think I've had quite enough bovine excrement to deal with this evening. I feel so much better getting it off my chest, so to speak.