Started By
Message
re: Aggies Sue Indy Colts over use of "12th man"...
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:35 pm to Lonnie Utah
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:35 pm to Lonnie Utah
I am a bit confused as to why some people are giving the aggies shite about this in this thread. They should 100% protect their trademarks. Seattle has permission. Indy just decided to use it, frick that.
0
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:35 pm to FishFearMe
LSU 7-1
Texas A&M 6-3
LSU national championships we have witnessed and can remember-2
Texas A&M national championships that nobody gives a shite about and no one alive remembers- 1.75
LSU>Texas a&m as long as you've had the ability of cognitive thought.
After saying that I would tell outside parties to put their money on Arkansas, they're going to give us some shite Saturday.
Texas A&M 6-3
LSU national championships we have witnessed and can remember-2
Texas A&M national championships that nobody gives a shite about and no one alive remembers- 1.75
LSU>Texas a&m as long as you've had the ability of cognitive thought.
After saying that I would tell outside parties to put their money on Arkansas, they're going to give us some shite Saturday.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:37 pm to CajunTiger_225
quote:
Thats it? I don't see the point if that's it. "Protecting" the trade mark isn't a real reason. They own it, they can tell whoever not to use it. I just get the vibe they don't care who uses if there's a price involved, but it's only 5k so I'm failing to see the point.
I'm not a lawyer or historian, but the way I recall it all going down was the Seahawks had been using it for several years before anybody noticed. Nobody noticed because nobody watched a terrible Seahawks team. I think in this case if A&M had pressed the issue that they had a chance of losing because Seattle had been doing it for a while. Why risk that when a licensing agreement limits what they can do with it?
That's not the case with Indy. A&M has been sending C&D letters since 2008, which have been ignored. I could be wrong but I don't see a licensing agreement being the end result of the suit.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:38 pm to Lonnie Utah
12th man is almost a pejorative term
Kyle Field was half empty by halftime last weekend. Aggies have a losing home record in SEC play.
Keep it you bottom tier program
Kyle Field was half empty by halftime last weekend. Aggies have a losing home record in SEC play.
Keep it you bottom tier program
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:38 pm to WestCoastAg
How does allowing an organization to use a trademark for 120k protect it more than letting no one use it at all? That looks more like it doesn't mean anything to the schools when there's enough money involved.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:38 pm to Johnny B Bad
Oh we will. Don't you worry
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:39 pm to CajunTiger_225
Well, would love to see this go a few rounds. I bet there might be some lawyers in Houston willing to provide some local counsel to Indianapolis.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:40 pm to CajunTiger_225
quote:probably because what happened with Seattle was completely different than what's going on with indy?
How does allowing an organization to use a trademark for 120k protect it more than letting no one use it at all
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:41 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
Oh we will. Don't you worry
12th man
Cant keep fans in the stands for 30 minutes of gameplay
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:41 pm to Johnny B Bad
quote:You've just been sued
12th man
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:43 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
That's not the case with Indy. A&M has been sending C&D letters since 2008, which have been ignored. I could be wrong but I don't see a licensing agreement being the end result of the suit.
In Fitbug, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California found that laches barred plaintiff Fitbug’s claims. In granting summary judgment, the court found that Fitbug knew or should have known of Fitbit after its launch in 2008, and that (despite sending a demand letter in late 2011) plaintiff’s delay until 2013 to file suit was unreasonable. The parties in Fitbug disputed whether a four-year or two-year limitations period applied. Although the court did not decide the issue because the delay was longer than four years, the court found that the two year period likely governed.
LINK
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:44 pm to oman
quote:
Was their actually a lawsuit in Seattle or was it all just angry letters?
I don't think there was even a threat of a lawsuit, and both sides worked things out amicably (at least in public). Like you said, nobody wants litigation.
In Indy's case I'm not sure what else A&M can do than sue. If they're telling the truth, C&D letters have been sent since '08.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:49 pm to finestfirst79
I happen to own the patent for pleather knee high riding boots. I sell exclusively to Gaggy Nation...any of you other SEC sumbitches try to wear my pleather boots will receive some jurisprudencial treatment.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:53 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
completely different than what's going on with indy?
Well I'm not talking about what's going on with Indy I would expect tha. I'm dialed in on the subtopic of how A&M doesn't care who uses the trademark as long as there is sums of money involved.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:54 pm to CajunTiger_225
If they demand some kind of consideration, no matter how small, it means they care.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:57 pm to CajunTiger_225
quote:proof outside of the seahawks? Surely there are others if this is true
I'm dialed in on the subtopic of how A&M doesn't care who uses the trademark as long as there is sums of money involved
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:58 pm to CajunTiger_225
We do care how folks use it as long as it's acknowledged that the term is our copyright, hence the sums of money.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 5:59 pm to TbirdSpur2010
What a crazy thought
Posted on 11/12/15 at 6:00 pm to oman
I guess I'm putting more emotion in to it but what I'm getting at is that I don't think a&m believes in that tradition if there's a price on it. I would think they wouldn't allow anyone to use it at all if it was that important to the school. Think about the principle of trademarking the "term" at all. To make it exclusive to the school. Finest had a good angle though about how the Seattle situation wasnt that cut and dry.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 6:01 pm to CajunTiger_225
quote:
I don't think a&m believes in that tradition if there's a price on it.
Page 4 of 9
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News