re: Aggies Sue Indy Colts over use of "12th man"...

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.

---

That just means you cannot grasp the situation at hand. You'll have to make peace with that on your own, I guess, because it's been laid out as plainly as can be.

quote:

---

You trademark something to make it yours and keeping others from making it theirs

---

Correct.

quote:

---

or using it, because you own it.

---

Incorrect.

quote:

---

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.

---

Your "standard" of thought is convoluted, then, I'm afraid.

This is a "you" problem, not a problem with A&M being disingenuous about the 12th Man.

quote:

---

Your "standard" of thought is convoluted, then, I'm afraid.

This is a "you" problem, not a problem with A&M being disingenuous about the 12th Man.

---

its not even a problem though because a&m doesnt just let people use it if they pay us. this would have some weight if we actually had a history of doing so. we dont. seattle does but that was so we wouldnt go to trial and possibly lose it all together. this shouldnt be an issue because it isnt one to begin with

For those concerned over why they charged $5,000 to use the name. It is not the amount that matters. IT is the fact that a precedent has been set in court and can be used as proof for others that try and use the trademark.

What a non stop troll fest this thread has become

quote:

---

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.

---

This is not unreasonable if you don't know the history of the trademark. But just take our word for it that you don't know anything about it.

quote:

---

Going to be a lot of pissed Aggies when they realize that nothing will be done....

---

We wish all teams would use our Trademarked phrase. We would get even more money.

I got hungry. Should we get back at it for time consuming purposes?

quote:

---

because it's been laid out as plainly as can be

---

I don't see it. All I keep reading from yall is "you don't know how trademarks work" and "because just because" without any further testament to the fact even though I'm not questioning the legalities of a trademark in any shape or form.
All Im pointing out is there's a different representation of not allowing it to be used whatsoever than allowing it to be used for a payment[insert thought: you don't know shite about trademarks]. Yes because A&m owns it they have that right to allow other organizations to use the term you under their circumstances don't have to tell me how a trademark works it's not chemical engineering. It's a very very simple definition and concept. The question is why is their a price on yalls copyright and biggest tradition and the answer isn't because that's how trademarks work
If I was in yalls shoes and loved my school like we all do I wouldn't want our biggest tradition, term, moniker, fight cry, war hymns, whatever the frick replicated elsewhere.
None of you have touched on that at all, just a bunch of blah blah you don't know about trademarks. If you don't care, just frickin say that, Jesus.

frickin-A, man.

quote:

---

except when we have

---

You haven't said jolly jack shite but gotten stuck on the current events with the Colts and tried to use that as precedence over precedents.
"We need to protect our copyright" and I'm saying why not protect your tradition and I guess thats where my train of thought might be a tad flawed. I don't see how its legally flawed like you said, which you can't explain, just able to say.
What I'm starting to gather is that this whole 12th man thing isn't as important to yall as I think it is.

quote:

---

you just glossed over where I pointed out how we settled with Seattle because we didn't want to go to trial because we could have lost our trademark alltogether

---

Is that suppose to be concrete information just because because again? To my knowledge A&m already owned the copyright and they were the ones who filed the lawsuit.

quote:

---

All I keep reading from yall is "you don't know how trademarks work" and "because just because"

---

Literally zero people have typed this

quote:

---

there's a different representation of not allowing it to be used whatsoever than allowing it to be used for a payment

---

Actually, there isn't

quote:

---

why is their a price on yalls copyright

---

Because of the bolded word.

quote:

---

and biggest tradition

---

This is a falsehood.

quote:

---

the answer isn't because that's how trademarks work

---

Except that it is.

quote:

---

If I was in yalls shoes

---

You are not.

quote:

---

I wouldn't want our biggest tradition, term, moniker, fight cry, war hymns, whatever the frick replicated elsewhere.

---

Again, this isn't our biggest tradition. Also, it's not being "replicated," it's being infringed upon. There is a difference.

quote:

---

If you don't care, just frickin say that, Jesus.

---

You keep angling for this response. We obviously DO care, hence countless cease and desist letters, and tireless defense of our copyright.

I really don't know what else you want us to say