Group Effort To Discourage High Schools From Using Trademarked Logos?

[ColeJ]

i don't mind when high school teams wear professional logos, as long as they don't pretend it is original in any way.

 

with one notable exception.

 

my old high school in red oak, texas is the hawks. when i went there (class of 2002) everything was maroon and white versions of the philadelphia eagles logo. it looked pretty good, but was obviously just the eagles logo (made a little more complicated by the fact that desoto, two towns north of red oak, were green and gold eagles, with philly's wings on their helmets). 

 

immediately after i graduated, they switched to a black and maroon heavy identity utilizing the atlanta falcons logo.

 

not a single person i talked to in red oak could comprehend why i thought that was so idiotic.

 

the atlanta falcons logo for the Red Oak Hawks.

 

the logo is just as much shaped like the letter F as it is shaped like a bird, if not more so. not really the letter you want associated with your high school.

pretty sure they've got an original, if bland, identity of their own now, though.

 

just my 2 cents and random story.

[C-Squared]

As both a teacher and designer, this is a tree up which I have many times barked... in my experiences, its very rare that an entire school "rebrands" just for the sake of rebranding. Most schools are provided a set of affordable pre-existing stock logos from vendors, which is usually the cheapest option. Public school budgets are tight and custom branding is a tough expense to justify as teachers get laid off left and right. However, teams with high equipment turnover (i.e. football) go for new looks independent from the school all the time and more involved coaches love creating polished looks that drum up team spirit. Its worth a shot pitching ideas to athletic directors, but targeting individual coaches and booster clubs is probably the most realistic way to get more original logos into high school sports.

[hettinger_rl]

On 5/2/2016 at 10:14 AM, C-Squared said:

As both a teacher and designer, this is a tree up which I have many times barked... in my experiences, its very rare that an entire school "rebrands" just for the sake of rebranding. Most schools are provided a set of affordable pre-existing stock logos from vendors, which is usually the cheapest option. Public school budgets are tight and custom branding is a tough expense to justify as teachers get laid off left and right. However, teams with high equipment turnover (i.e. football) go for new looks independent from the school all the time and more involved coaches love creating polished looks that drum up team spirit. Its worth a shot pitching ideas to athletic directors, but targeting individual coaches and booster clubs is probably the most realistic way to get more original logos into high school sports.

I'm a teacher and designer as well and my school's logos are:

--------- 

---- 

 ----- 

 

And they plaster them all over EVERYTHING..... especially merchandise. I've thought many times of sending a letter to the logos' owners, but don'e want to be fired. Since I teach art it would be easy for them to do.

I know I could put a brand together for them. But I also know I'd get it all done and they'd look at all the stuff they'd have to remove and change and they'd back out.

[Gothamite]

You could always report the school anonymously to the huge conglomerate that controls NCAA marks. If your school has to lose the "A" anyway, and is made aware that other owners might come knocking, the administration might be up for your total rebrand. 

[mark_lavis]

On 5/4/2016 at 8:15 AM, hettinger_rl said:

I'm a teacher and designer as well and my school's logos are:

--------- 

---- 

 ----- 

 

And they plaster them all over EVERYTHING..... especially merchandise. I've thought many times of sending a letter to the logos' owners, but don'e want to be fired. Since I teach art it would be easy for them to do.

I know I could put a brand together for them. But I also know I'd get it all done and they'd look at all the stuff they'd have to remove and change and they'd back out.

 

I think what irritates me the most is how lazy it is to use the Arizona "A" even though the school already has an "AC" in use on the Eagles logo. Also would've never thought that the one eagle logo resembled a Harley Davidson logo.  That's my main issue. Imagine how many other instances there are of lesser known logos that don't have the notoriety of a nationally-recognized pro or college team being used because the NFL has set a precedent that some programs and booster clubs see as "we're just a high school. we should be alright using another team's logo. there's no problem with that."

[dont care]

3 minutes ago, mark_lavis said:

 

I think what irritates me the most is how lazy it is to use the Arizona "A" even though the school already has an "AC" in use on the Eagles logo. Also would've never thought that the one eagle logo resembled a Harley Davidson logo.  That's my main issue. Imagine how many other instances there are of lesser known logos that don't have the notoriety of a nationally-recognized pro or college team being used because the NFL has set a precedent that some programs and booster clubs see as "we're just a high school. we should be alright using another team's logo. there's no problem with that."

Well it's up to those teams that are having there logos stolen to fight to protect it. It isn't anyone else's duty.

[mark_lavis]

On 5/4/2016 at 1:02 PM, Gothamite said:

You could always report the school anonymously to the huge conglomerate that controls NCAA marks. If your school has to lose the "A" anyway, and is made aware that other owners might come knocking, the administration might be up for your total rebrand. 

 

I don't think that should be the first step. However, after you inform the crucial parties at the school about the cons of using a trademarked logo and the pros of using a stock logo/original logo, if they were to shrug you off then and they "so what" then I'd say step in with that step. Outside of the four major leagues, you'd be surprised who doesn't want anyone using their logo. I read a case of where the University of Oregon sent a cease and desist letter to a small school in Indiana, I believe, because they were using their logo without permission. Same thing has happened with colleges like Penn State, Florida, and Texas. 

[mark_lavis]

4 minutes ago, dont care said:

Well it's up to those teams that are having there logos stolen to fight to protect it. It isn't anyone else's duty.

 

It's about precedent. It matters because if the big guys like the NFL don't care then it puts a burden on smaller teams who have their logo stolen. Also, there roughly 30k high schools in the US. I tried, having nothing else to do, to make something that resembled a database of high schools who used trademarked logos. Five states, all of which had well-maintained HS databases of their own including three that had the schools' current logo, took me a week to make. And these were some small-medium sized states (WA, OR, ID, SC, NV). 

 

How on earth, if you are for example a minor league hockey team, are you supposed to figure out if anyone is using your logo on your own. The idea of tracking down high school logos in CA, TX, and NY nearly gave me a panic attack. It's about opportunity cost. It's still important to these teams and programs that someone is diluting their brand and potentially making a profit while doing so, but not even most D1 programs have the manpower to regulate this on a reasonable basis. Schools like Penn State, Texas, and Florida have fought schools using their logo in the past because they're Penn State, Texas, and Florida. Pretty sure schools like University of the Incarnate Word and Towson University have the same ability/resources to do the same. 

 

If I were a school and used the logo for Sportslogo.net as my own, would Chris ever find out? Probably not. And, if he did, I bet it would be because someone who was watching out for him and this site alerted him of the use. Kind of like what you're arguing we shouldn't do. Sorry Chris, tough out of luck. Hope my school doesn't make too much money off of your work. 

[mark_lavis]

On 5/2/2016 at 8:14 AM, C-Squared said:

As both a teacher and designer, this is a tree up which I have many times barked... in my experiences, its very rare that an entire school "rebrands" just for the sake of rebranding. Most schools are provided a set of affordable pre-existing stock logos from vendors, which is usually the cheapest option. Public school budgets are tight and custom branding is a tough expense to justify as teachers get laid off left and right. However, teams with high equipment turnover (i.e. football) go for new looks independent from the school all the time and more involved coaches love creating polished looks that drum up team spirit. Its worth a shot pitching ideas to athletic directors, but targeting individual coaches and booster clubs is probably the most realistic way to get more original logos into high school sports.

 

I understand the issue with regards to cost which, if you can't pay for it immediately, to have a long-term plan set in stone at least to ween yourself off of a trademarked logo onto an original logo or a stock logo that's meant to be use by multiple programs. I've seen, for example, the same wolf-like logo at least a dozen times across multiple states. It's a stock logo though created for the sole purpose of being used multiple times. 

 

From my experience talking with numerous ADs, it has always been the football team/football boosters that have spearheaded the use of trademarked logos. Some were quite aware of what they were doing and doing it in order to eliminate costs that could go toward better uniforms or practice equipment. Others however were oblivious (can't 100% confirm that) to using a logo that they found online and decided to use it thinking it was free game. Or, in one instance, a design firm reportedly told the school the logo they were providing was free of trademark when in fact it wasn't (they've since changed back to their old stock logo). 

[mark_lavis]

On 5/2/2016 at 10:07 PM, ColeJ said:

i don't mind when high school teams wear professional logos, as long as they don't pretend it is original in any way.

 

with one notable exception.

 

my old high school in red oak, texas is the hawks. when i went there (class of 2002) everything was maroon and white versions of the philadelphia eagles logo. it looked pretty good, but was obviously just the eagles logo (made a little more complicated by the fact that desoto, two towns north of red oak, were green and gold eagles, with philly's wings on their helmets). 

 

immediately after i graduated, they switched to a black and maroon heavy identity utilizing the atlanta falcons logo.

 

not a single person i talked to in red oak could comprehend why i thought that was so idiotic.

 

the atlanta falcons logo for the Red Oak Hawks.

 

the logo is just as much shaped like the letter F as it is shaped like a bird, if not more so. not really the letter you want associated with your high school.

pretty sure they've got an original, if bland, identity of their own now, though.

 

just my 2 cents and random story.

 

At least they didn't slap like an intertwined R & O on top of the Falcons logo to try and justify that. That was comes off as looking bad in my mind. I don't know why schools can think just slapping letters on a logo still makes it look good. 

 

Would have made much more sense if they stayed in the same city and used the retro Atlanta Hawks logo. At least with that logo you have the circle that could represent Oak. 

[Sykotyk]

First, whatever you enjoy doing, go ahead and do it. This is obviously what you find enjoying in life.

 

However, I think you need to realize why the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was setup and why trademarks exist in the first place and why they're protected.

 

This is so another department store can't create a red bullseye logo as their own. But, a Sports Outfitter could. It's to protect one entity from the infringement of another.

 

The problem is.... if some high school has a brown and yellow colored Carolina Panthers jersey they didn't lose one cent in revenue from their regular merchandise sales. They didn't get one person confused that they weren't affiliated with the NFL team.

 

That's why trademarks were setup as a protected entity enforced by the government. To facilitate trade.  So that when a person buys Coca-Cola they know it's from the Coca-Cola Company of Atlanta, Georgia and not Coca-Cola Corporation of Erie, Pennsylvania. Where you, as the consumer, might not get what you thought you were paying for. To protect the consumer from not having yet another aspect of their life they have to investigate on their own to verify their own financial and personal safety.

 

It's why we have things like the Better Business Bureau. It's why we have consumer protections. It's why we have things like recalls and UL branding on appliances. It's why the FCC administrates radiowaves so that in the channel we think we're tuning in to is the channel we believe it is. That Steve down the street can't just setp a transponder and broadcast his own station to drown out another. It's why the pager system in your house is regulated to make sure it doesn't interfere with other devices in your house.

 

It's a form of protection. For all sides.

 

At some point, the idea of copyright or trademark or patent became 'property'. It wasn't just a short-term right to protect from someone attempting to defraud your customers and lose your revenue to a competitor. It became a hammer with which to bash the consumer's heads in if they didn't pony up the rates you wanted or the manner in which you want to display it.

 

It's why in the 30s there was a New York Yankees football team. Or why three different sports had a team called the Pittsburgh Pirates. Because your protection was very focused and limited. You had to actually show harm to claim your trademark or copyright protection. You had to show it infringed on your specific market and product.

 

The San Jose Sharks can't restrict the Jacksonville Sharks from using the name. Or the Pittsburgh Pirates going after the Portland Pirates. Or the Pittsburgh Steelers or Pirates can't stop the Pittsburgh Penguins from using black and yellow. It's why you see those gaudy knockoffs that just say "Pittsburgh" in black and yellow and clearly reference one of the sports teams in town.

 

Because Pittsburgh, as the city name, is too vague to be protected on its own. But "Pittsburgh Steelers" or "Steelers" can be.

 

NO ONE is going to confuse Edison High School with Kansas State University. No one is going to confuse the examples listed above. You've gone beyond the original intent of trademark. There is no loss and there is no harm.

 

Until Cleveland, Tennessee's high school wants to rebrand itself as the Cleveland Browns could you see an argument as it is a direct assumption of a name or mark representing the same.

 

In the end, I think you're wasting your time. I think those whose marks are infringed upon in a manner that costs them customers or revenue are going to find out on their own as their own projected revenue or customer base declines.

 

In a country of over 300 million people and over 16,000 high schools, the 1200 or so professional or collegiate teams whose logos might be used are negligible at best, or annoying at worse.

 

You're taking a thimble to the beach and hoping to drain the ocean. You will not succeed and you will simply waste your time in the process.

 

(P.S., while you're fighting for the rights of trademarks, go fight the NFL over suing a band of upset Bengals fans that created a parody logo who didn't have the finances to fight a rather blatant overreach by the NFL. Or, while you're at it, argue that all these 'fans' in sportslogos.net from making mock logos of teams or uniform concepts. As they're unfairly infringed upon if someone likes their mockup more than the team's official and maybe decide not to buy the officially licensed apparel because it's not as good as it could be. I mean, imagined loss is imagined loss, right?)

 

[Gothamite]

Oh, come now. Your post was too inpassioned, too thorough, to be capped off with a straw man.  It's not just loss of income, it's dilution of a brand.  If one looks at the Atlanta Falcons logo and thinks instead of the local high school, that's decided harm. The Falcons paid for that logo and should reap every last bit of benefit from it.  Now they've allowed groups to use it under limited circumstances, which is extremely generous and much more than they need to do. 

 

I'm not familiar with your Bengals situation, and would love a thread to explore that.  But parody and fair use don't apply to this conversation. 

 

Even conceding for the moment that your history is correct, the nature of law is to change and evolve as society does.  In the 1930s, the name "New York Yankees" only had value when printed on a ticket.  That's no longer the case in a world where their customers aren't just people who can take the 4 train to the Bronx but literally anyone in the world with an Internet connection.  When you can buy a Yankee cap on any continent, the mark must be protected everywhere it can be. 

[mark_lavis]

 

You sir (I assume)...that is all. I like your straw man at the end. Very inventive. I mean, I've been talking about trademarked logos being used by high schools the whole time but very Trump of you to try and make a 180 degree pivot at the last second in your fading breath to try and undermine my argument with a cold :censored: to the face. Then again, you do appear to come from, or at least support in some manner, a minor league hockey background where the co-owner was so lazy at coming up with a team brand, he just copy and pasted his company's brand onto the hockey team. I have nothing against that. He owns both the fireworks company and hockey team so he can do whatever the hell he wants with that logo.

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

First, whatever you enjoy doing, go ahead and do it. This is obviously what you find enjoying in life.

 

I will. Thank you.

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

However, I think you need to realize why the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was setup and why trademarks exist in the first place and why they're protected.

 

This is so another department store can't create a red bullseye logo as their own. But, a Sports Outfitter could. It's to protect one entity from the infringement of another.

 

That's what Sports Authority did wrong. I'll go tell them they're free to use Target's logo. I mean, like you said, Target should find no issue with that. Maybe that'll get them out of bankruptcy. 

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

The problem is.... if some high school has a brown and yellow colored Carolina Panthers jersey they didn't lose one cent in revenue from their regular merchandise sales. They didn't get one person confused that they weren't affiliated with the NFL team.

 

No duh. Who would wear a brown and yellow Carolina Panthers jersey. A blind person? Nawh, even they'd be able to smell the odor of poor fashion choice. I mean did you see those vintage Denver Broncos uniforms a couple of years ago. Yuck. 

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

That's why trademarks were setup as a protected entity enforced by the government. To facilitate trade.  So that when a person buys Coca-Cola they know it's from the Coca-Cola Company of Atlanta, Georgia and not Coca-Cola Corporation of Erie, Pennsylvania.

 

"Erie Coca-Cola Bottling, located in Erie, Pa., is a regional plant that bottles and distributes numerous Coca-Cola brand beverages, including Coca-Cola, Dr. Pepper, Minute-Maid, Sprite, Fresca, Frutopia, Mello Yello, Nestea and Powerade. The company manufactures most of its finished products from syrups and concentrates that it buys from The Coca-Cola Company and other licensors. It is a member of Coca-Cola Enterprises, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Coca-Cola Company."

 

So yeah, Cola-Cola Company of Atlanta and Coca-Cola Corporation of Erie are the same company actually so theoretically a person could be buying Coca-Cola from the Erie and Atlanta companies at the same time. Wow, trippy...

 

Don't know what this has to do with high school logos though.

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

Where you, as the consumer, might not get what you thought you were paying for. To protect the consumer from not having yet another aspect of their life they have to investigate on their own to verify their own financial and personal safety.

 

It's why we have things like the Better Business Bureau. It's why we have consumer protections. It's why we have things like recalls and UL branding on appliances. It's why the FCC administrates radiowaves so that in the channel we think we're tuning in to is the channel we believe it is. It's so Steve down the street can't just setup a transponder and broadcast his own station to drown out another. It's why the pager system in your house is regulated to make sure it doesn't interfere with other devices in your house.

 

It's a form of protection. For all sides.

 

Okay...thank you for the reminding me of my first lecture in BA 101. I appreciate it. Also had no idea people are running Buffalo Wild Wings out of their houses (since, you know, the pager system and all...I would've went with a joke about how pagers are so 1990s but that would've been a bit unoriginal). 

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

At some point, the idea of copyright or trademark or patent became 'property'. It wasn't just a short-term right to protect from someone attempting to defraud your customers and lose your revenue to a competitor. It became a hammer with which to bash the consumer's heads in if they didn't pony up the rates you wanted or the manner in which you want to display it.

 

I can sense you are a proponent for shrinking the copyright duration. However, I don't see many high schools using logos that were created before 1923. It sucks, I know, but blame voters in the 1990s for voting for politicians who were successfully lobbied by Disney in the late 90s and thus drastically extended the copyright duration for published works.

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

It's why in the 30s there was a New York Yankees football team.

 

It's also because the owner of the New York Yankees football team, Dan Topping, owned the Yankees football team (1946-49 fyi) at the same time he owned the Yankees baseball team from 1945-64. 

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

Or why three different sports had a team called the Pittsburgh Pirates.

 

Personally, I'm glad we've evolved since the 1930s. I imagine a lot of people would be mad if we advocated for the good ol' days of law and order like you're suggesting. 

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

Because your protection was very focused and limited. You had to actually show harm to claim your trademark or copyright protection. You had to show it infringed on your specific market and product.

 

The San Jose Sharks can't restrict the Jacksonville Sharks from using the name. Or the Pittsburgh Pirates going after the Portland Pirates. Or the Pittsburgh Steelers or Pirates can't stop the Pittsburgh Penguins from using black and yellow. It's why you see those gaudy knockoffs that just say "Pittsburgh" in black and yellow and clearly reference one of the sports teams in town.

 

Darn, and I was thinking about trademarking the color combination red, white, and blue. How stupid am I...

I get it, there are STUPID trademarks all the time (I'm looking at you, Amazon) but you are really starting to grasp at straws now trying to make my argument seem like a slippery slope. 

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

Because Pittsburgh, as the city name, is too vague to be protected on its own. But "Pittsburgh Steelers" or "Steelers" can be.

 

Right, that's because Pittsburgh is a common word...

 

Once again, what does this have to do with high schools using trademarked logos...

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

NO ONE is going to confuse Edison High School with Kansas State University. No one is going to confuse the examples listed above. You've gone beyond the original intent of trademark. There is no loss and there is no harm.

 

Okay smart guy, tell me. I just walked into my local Walgreens. Why would I buy the sweater on the left?

 

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

In the end, I think you're wasting your time. I think those whose marks are infringed upon in a manner that costs them customers or revenue are going to find out on their own as their own projected revenue or customer base declines.

 

In a country of over 300 million people and over 16,000 high schools, the 1200 or so professional or collegiate teams whose logos might be used are negligible at best, or annoying at worse.

 

Got to love that defeatist attitude. A real inspiration for the young designers out there whose trying to make a living doing something they love.

 

5 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

 

You're taking a thimble to the beach and hoping to drain the ocean. You will not succeed and you will simply waste your time in the process.

 

Oh the poetry. You must be a scholar my friend. Anyways, have a nice day Donald. 

[dont care]

You lose all credibility when you revert to name calling.

[Cosmic]

10 hours ago, Sykotyk said:

At some point, the idea of copyright or trademark or patent became 'property'. It wasn't just a short-term right to protect from someone attempting to defraud your customers and lose your revenue to a competitor.

 

You're seriously missing the boat on the USPTO. You make it sound like the FDA of ideas. A major point is that by protecting creators' rights to profit from their work, you encourage creativity. Consumer clarity is a byproduct.

[C-Squared]

Did anything ever come from that Adidas program to help schools named after controversial historical figures rebrand?

[mark_lavis]

6 hours ago, C-Squared said:

Did anything ever come from that Adidas program to help schools named after controversial historical figures rebrand?

 

As of late November, so a month after the program was announced, an Adidas spokesperson said that 80 high schools so far had reached out to Adidas "to discuss the possibility of changing their mascot." No specifics on which high schools those 80 are. I imagine that number has since increased over the past few months. Adidas estimated 2,000 high schools out of the ~27k in the US still use disparaging logos. 

[BrandMooreArt]

On 5/1/2016 at 4:47 PM, Gothamite said:

I'm pretty sure they came out and said it at one point, but I'll see if I can find a source. 

 

EDIT: okay, I've got it.  We established it in a thread a long time back:

 

So as of seven years ago, this was the league's policy: 

 

NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said his organization is "deeply committed" to supporting youth football and does not have a problem with high school programs adopting and using NFL team logos.

"We simply ask that the schools do not alter or change the color of the logos, " he said. The organization also asks high schools not to sell merchandise in a manner that would lead fans to believe it is officially licensed by the NFL or the team, he said.

 

as far as i know, this is still an option for teams. i dont know all the specifics of this, but there are certainly teams that encourage high schools to use their logos (because if you can't hook kids as future players with the decline of youth football participation, they'll hook them as future fans by establishing an early connection to their brands). but i also know of a couple of teams that do send out C&D letters. one that always stuck with me was the NY Giants suing a model because she had pictures of herself on her site (self promotion) wearing an officially licensed Giants jersey (with visible NYG logo under the collar)

 

9 hours ago, C-Squared said:

Did anything ever come from that Adidas program to help schools named after controversial historical figures rebrand?

good question. i'll try to follow up on this. 

[mark_lavis]

7 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

as far as i know, this is still an option for teams. i dont know all the specifics of this, but there are certainly teams that encourage high schools to use their logos (because if you can't hook kids as future players with the decline of youth football participation, they'll hook them as future fans by establishing an early connection to their brands). but i also know of a couple of teams that do send out C&D letters. one that always stuck with me was the NY Giants suing a model because she had pictures of herself on her site (self promotion) wearing an officially licensed Giants jersey (with visible NYG logo under the collar)

 

Recently, my local high school (the Eisenhower Cadets pictured above) were told last fall by the NFL they could no longer purchase new decals and such for team equipment so they were forced to rebrand their athletics this past winter. I believe it was mostly due to the fact that Eisenhower uses the same exact color combination as the New England Patriots and they've been using their exact logo up until this point for athletics without any sort of alterations. 

[Gothamite]

12 minutes ago, mark_lavis said:

Recently, my local high school (the Eisenhower Cadets pictured above) were told last fall by the NFL they could no longer purchase new decals and such for team equipment so they were forced to rebrand their athletics this past winter. I believe it was mostly due to the fact that Eisenhower uses the same exact color combination as the New England Patriots and they've been using their exact logo up until this point for athletics without any sort of alterations. 

 

That's interesting, and it indicates that the policy may have indeed changed, since the "no alterations" policy was perfectly in line with the NFL's request. 

 

Did your school sell merchandise?  If they ran afoul of the other condition, it's possible that the NFL would send a C&D without indicating any change to the general policy.