Even motivational signs need permission

[Raymie]

So ASU puts up this motivational banner in their locker room, and someone put out a Twitter picture of it:

Just one problem: ASU didn't have permission to use the University of Arizona "A" logo. The AD in Tucson is aware of it but isn't sure if he wants to file a complaint yet.

[pheer]

I understand the IP theft issue. I really do. But someone, somewhere, needs to draw a line and knock the goofy off. It's a banner. ONE. So are they going to sue ASU and the banner maker? Possibly shut down a business over something so petty? This isn't a mass-production counterfeit operation. Before you say it, I know, even once is still illegal. But where do we draw the line between protecting marks and being petty or silly?

[MJWalker45]

I'm pretty sure there are anti-Michigan signs at Ohio State with a block M on it. If its not meant to be sold to make money for ASU I don't see an issue. But at the same time if these were put all over campus Arizona would probably have a real grievance.

[patsox]

It'll only be a matter of time before PETA's all over this one.

[hockey week]

What happened to "Fair Use"? Unless Arizona would make a really good argument that they're making money off of that banner, it should be covered under that. You can use any copyright or trademark if it's limited enough.

There's also major protection for parody. I remember an Oklahoma shirt that had the Texas Longhorns logo with the horns broken off, and Texas sued and lost because it was a parody. Weird Al Yankovic has made a career off of that protection. Considering ASU is using that in their locker room, I'd say that it should definitely be protected by that, trademark or not.

[CrazyAnna]

So ASU puts up this motivational banner in their locker room, and someone put out a Twitter picture of it:

Just one problem: ASU didn't have permission to use the University of Arizona "A" logo. The AD in Tucson is aware of it but isn't sure if he wants to file a complaint yet.

So what? Absolutely nothing will come of it.

[Mingjai]

What happened to "Fair Use"? Unless Arizona would make a really good argument that they're making money off of that banner, it should be covered under that. You can use any copyright or trademark if it's limited enough.

There's also major protection for parody. I remember an Oklahoma shirt that had the Texas Longhorns logo with the horns broken off, and Texas sued and lost because it was a parody. Weird Al Yankovic has made a career off of that protection. Considering ASU is using that in their locker room, I'd say that it should definitely be protected by that, trademark or not.

Should be fair use...

The issue I suppose is that fair use is an affirmative defense--i.e., ASU can't raise it until they've been sued, and once you're at that point, you've spent thousands in legal fees and it's a crapshoot as to whether the judge or jury agree with you. Entities are so risk averse these days that it's easier for them to comply with a cease & decist than to fight it.

[schlim]

The University of Texas really frowns upon illegal use and sale of its Longhorn logo, especially by Oklahoma:

http://newsok.com/scene-heardbruse-of-inverted-longhorn-logo-ignites-controversy/article/2868537

[vicfurth]

What happened to "Fair Use"? Unless Arizona would make a really good argument that they're making money off of that banner, it should be covered under that. You can use any copyright or trademark if it's limited enough.

There's also major protection for parody. I remember an Oklahoma shirt that had the Texas Longhorns logo with the horns broken off, and Texas sued and lost because it was a parody. Weird Al Yankovic has made a career off of that protection. Considering ASU is using that in their locker room, I'd say that it should definitely be protected by that, trademark or not.

Texas A&M does that too. Goes with part their fight song: "saw the varsity's horns off."

[RyanB06]

Plus keep in mind that Arizona and Arizona State hate each other.

[STL FANATIC]

Personally, I'd draw the line at a combination of non-profit, not for public consumption, and limited quantity.

It may or may not still technically be illegal, but I think common sense tells you to let this one go.

With that said, I have no idea why ASU would use their logo in that manner. I understand Arizona is the opponent and the words say "Beat Cats", but it just looks like an Arizona themed banner.

They'd be better off utilizing their own A or using the Arizona A but with a circle/slash on top of it.

[BrandMooreArt]

What happened to "Fair Use"? Unless Arizona would make a really good argument that they're making money off of that banner, it should be covered under that. You can use any copyright or trademark if it's limited enough.

There's also major protection for parody. I remember an Oklahoma shirt that had the Texas Longhorns logo with the horns broken off, and Texas sued and lost because it was a parody. Weird Al Yankovic has made a career off of that protection. Considering ASU is using that in their locker room, I'd say that it should definitely be protected by that, trademark or not.

Should be fair use...

The issue I suppose is that fair use is an affirmative defense--i.e., ASU can't raise it until they've been sued, and once you're at that point, you've spent thousands in legal fees and it's a crapshoot as to whether the judge or jury agree with you. Entities are so risk averse these days that it's easier for them to comply with a cease & decist than to fight it.

yea i think you guys have it right. im not the best with the legal stuff, but if this is an on campus banner with no intention to profit, it shouldnt be an issue

[MJWalker45]

They could always make up a block white A with a red A inside it. So even though it's not the actual A, the message is still sent without stepping on intellectual property.