Started By
Message
re: Aggies Sue Indy Colts over use of "12th man"...
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:23 pm to WestCoastAg
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:23 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
we are still waiting on this. Apparently because we took money from the Seahawks years ago in an infinitely different situation, it indicates that a&m uses its trademark protection as a money grab
Yeah he is arguing worthless things
You guys embarass yourselves year in and year out by paying 5 million to a bad coach that has a losing SEC record.
Embarassing yourselves for 150,000 is nothing in comparison
Frankly I just dont think you guys give a single frick
2
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:24 pm to Johnny B Bad
quote:
Johnny B Dumb
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:24 pm to WestCoastAg
The season must be going really swell.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:25 pm to nc14
What does that have to do with us protecting our trademark?
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:25 pm to WestCoastAg
Like you said, it's a different situation both leading with a&m having the ability to prevent all other non affiliated organizations of using the trademark.
I fully understand the need of suing the colts because they are using it and wiping their arse with cease and desist letter. frickin duh you need to stop those bastards. What I don't understand is allowing others to use it for money when the tradition is so important to all of yall but not important enough to be exclusively for a&m, even though yall have the power do so, if someone is willing to pay the coin.
I fully understand the need of suing the colts because they are using it and wiping their arse with cease and desist letter. frickin duh you need to stop those bastards. What I don't understand is allowing others to use it for money when the tradition is so important to all of yall but not important enough to be exclusively for a&m, even though yall have the power do so, if someone is willing to pay the coin.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:26 pm to Johnny B Bad
quote:
Johnny B Bad
This pendejo is doing his damndest to get some sort of attention
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:29 pm to CajunTiger_225
quote:
What I don't understand is allowing others to use it for money when the tradition is so important to all of yall but not important enough to be exclusively for a&m
Because (for the umpteenth time), it's not about simple exclusivity.
Allowing others to use it under certain circumstances under our legal purview doesn't lessen its importance to us.
Not really that difficult to understand, tbh.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:29 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
protecting our trademark
Hopefully you are better at that than you are at football. It just seems really weird that this is where you draw your line in the sand.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:29 pm to CajunTiger_225
quote:why do you keep saying this when there is only one scenario of this and you agree that it was a completely different situation than all the others?
What I don't understand is allowing others to use it for money when the tradition is so important to all of yall but not important enough to be exclusively for a&m
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:33 pm to nc14
quote:
Hopefully you are better at that than you are at football.
We'll be just fine at it regardless of gridiron exploits
quote:
It just seems really weird that this is where you draw your line in the sand.
Dig deep, attempt once more to wrap your feeble mind around a simple legal concept.
Don't let aggy outsmart you.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:40 pm to TbirdSpur2010
Of the Ag posters I really did not expect you to stoop to this.
Speaking of trademarks, want to know where the AD employee that tried to stop artist's portraits for Bama is now? Oklahoma, good riddance.
At least the cheers are safe right?
Oh, the feeble mind part, so special. Well done and so sophisticated, I probably won't even get it.
Speaking of trademarks, want to know where the AD employee that tried to stop artist's portraits for Bama is now? Oklahoma, good riddance.
At least the cheers are safe right? Oh, the feeble mind part, so special. Well done and so sophisticated, I probably won't even get it.
This post was edited on 11/12/15 at 7:44 pm
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:41 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
The administration doesn't want to make it exclusive?
How does accepting money from Seattle and allowing them to use it prove the opposite?
I'm not saying money grab, I'm just saying whoever the frick at a&m handling these issues is more focused on protecting the investment of the trademark than keeping the integrity of the tradition, that they push all of you to belive in, exclusive to the School and the fans. On my end if their heart was in the tradition of the 12th man then they wouldn't let anyone use it AT ALL for any sum of money. I believe in the cease and desist orders and suing to protect infringement. But approving Seattle permissions for cash has a different feel than making the 12th man exclusive to a&m.
Useless arguments but just speaking out on a message board.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:46 pm to CajunTiger_225
quote:because if we didn't settle, we could have possibly lost our trademark? Nah that can't be it
How does accepting money from Seattle and allowing them to use it prove the opposite?
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:47 pm to nc14
quote:
Of the Ag posters I really did not expect you to stoop to this.
Meaning you think I won't say something when you start talking shite about my alma mater? Not sure what ever gave you that impression
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:50 pm to TbirdSpur2010
Meaning I did not think that you were the sensitive type, especially over a silly matter such as this. I was wrong, again. Keep that focus, it should really pay off, feebly speaking.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:51 pm to nc14
quote:you think any of us are actually upset over this?
Meaning I did not think that you were the sensitive type, especially over a silly matter such as this
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:53 pm to WestCoastAg
What? shite... excuse me. Where's the door?
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:54 pm to nc14
fricked if i knew
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:54 pm to TbirdSpur2010
Same thought from before. We just aren't going to level on this at all. Because
Just doesn't make sense to me and I don't see how my train of thought doesnt, since we're being honest. You trademark something to make it yours and keeping others from making it theirs or using it, because you own it. If you allow others to use something with permissions then I don't see how that falls under the same beliefs of making it yours, it only does by law.
That thought has absolutely nothing to do with the principle of protecting a trademark. It's the principle of believing in a tradition that a&m legally made exclusive to a&m. I don't see how that belief isn't defied when you allow it to be used under a payment plan. Has nothing to do with how a trademark works. Zero. Just different standards of thought.
quote:
Allowing others to use it under certain circumstances under our legal purview doesn't lessen its importance to us.
Just doesn't make sense to me and I don't see how my train of thought doesnt, since we're being honest. You trademark something to make it yours and keeping others from making it theirs or using it, because you own it. If you allow others to use something with permissions then I don't see how that falls under the same beliefs of making it yours, it only does by law.
That thought has absolutely nothing to do with the principle of protecting a trademark. It's the principle of believing in a tradition that a&m legally made exclusive to a&m. I don't see how that belief isn't defied when you allow it to be used under a payment plan. Has nothing to do with how a trademark works. Zero. Just different standards of thought.
Posted on 11/12/15 at 7:54 pm to nc14
quote:
Meaning I did not think that you were the sensitive type, especially over a silly matter such as this. I was wrong, again. Keep that focus, it should really pay off, feebly speaking.
Damn, that "feeble" quip really stung you, huh? Second time you've mentioned it
And you want to call others "sensitive."
Page 7 of 9
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News