Jump to content

NFL, Titans Oppose Trademark of Roughnecks XFL Logo


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, CrimsonBull9584 said:

 

How petty is the NFL? If they really cared about the Oilers brand, they would have never let them rename themselves the Titans.

To be fair, the primary logo was close enough that they were going to have issues with teh NFL, especially if the NFL has plans for the Oilers name and logos beyond simple throwback sales in the team store. It's about protecting their brands, but the second logo I have a hard time feeling it could be confused with the Flying Elvis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, CrimsonBull9584 said:

 

How petty is the NFL? If they really cared about the Oilers brand, they would have never let them rename themselves the Titans.

 

It's not necessarily being petty.  If you don't defend your trademarks you risk losing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CrimsonBull9584 said:

 

How petty is the NFL? If they really cared about the Oilers brand, they would have never let them rename themselves the Titans.

You might want to look into trademark law before you start commenting on something you clearly don’t understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/7/2021 at 5:52 PM, CrimsonBull9584 said:

 

How petty is the NFL? If they really cared about the Oilers brand, they would have never let them rename themselves the Titans.


How insecure is the XFL, that they have to steal somebody else’s brand rather than build their own?  If they really believed in their product they would never have tried to fool people into thinking it’s something else.  🤷🏽‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Gothamite said:


How insecure is the XFL, that they have to steal somebody else’s brand rather than build their own?  If they really believed in their product they would never have tried to fool people into thinking it’s something else.  🤷🏽‍♂️

I think it's a case of, "Houston fans miss the Oilers, let's see what we can get away with". Obviously they went to close to the sun so we'll see at least one rebrand if they hit the field again. I think the name works, but how do they go about making a new logo that isn't a downgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

I think it's a case of, "Houston fans miss the Oilers, let's see what we can get away with". Obviously they went to close to the sun so we'll see at least one rebrand if they hit the field again.

 

Yep.  No doubt that was the thinking.  And also no doubt that the NFL was absolutely right to smack them down for trying it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

Yep.  No doubt that was the thinking.  And also no doubt that the NFL was absolutely right to smack them down for trying it. 

 

 

I gotta disagree with you on this. Are you seriously defending the NFL?

 

The NFL is wrong to bully a competing league. All I see is the NFL unfairly crushing a league that was only able to play half of its season last year.

 

Plus, the NFL was wrong to let Bud Adams move the Oilers in the first place, let alone allow him to take the history and branding with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, neo_prankster said:

 

I gotta disagree with you on this. Are you seriously defending the NFL?

 

The NFL is wrong to bully a competing league. All I see is the NFL unfairly crushing a league that was only able to play half of its season last year.

 

Plus, the NFL was wrong to let Bud Adams move the Oilers in the first place, let alone allow him to take the history and branding with him.

 

I mean... it's been explained plenty of times in this thread why NFL had to do it, but if you think your opinions are more valid than trademark law, then have at it.

 

But while I'm here... how the F is the NFL "crushing a league" by making a team change it's obviously-ripped-off logo?  Talk about an overreaction.  The goddam league isn't even really a league right now, and is essentially starting over at some point - that team had no brand equity, and may not even exist in XFL 3.0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, neo_prankster said:

I gotta disagree with you on this. Are you seriously defending the NFL?

The NFL is not some ultimate evil here. It's just a legal actor, doing what is legally required of it. And as it just so happens, the law is on their side. It's not a subjective opinion, it's an objective reality. The NFL has the legal upper hand here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would've been so much easier if the Houston Roughnecks adhered to another wholly internet derived copyright rule about changing 30% or 40% of the original logo in order to make it their own. (I can't remember the actual amount, but I'm sure some of the board's copyright experts can correct me)

 

Also, people upset with the NFL in all this is outrageous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, schlim said:

It would've been so much easier if the Houston Roughnecks adhered to another wholly internet derived copyright rule about changing 30% or 40% of the original logo in order to make it their own. (I can't remember the actual amount, but I'm sure some of the board's copyright experts can correct me)

 

Also, people upset with the NFL in all this is outrageous.

That isn’t a thing. How do you determine what 30% of a logo is? It’s all about if it can cause confusion, that is the standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dont care said:

That isn’t a thing. How do you determine what 30% of a logo is? It’s all about if it can cause confusion, that is the standard.

I know its not a thing, thats why I couched it with "wholly internet derived copyright rule about changing 30% or 40%". I thought the sarcasm would be apparent.  if people were arguing about the NFL's right to defend their copyright, I was hoping to nip things in the bud before some internet copyright sleuth decided the logo was more than 30% different than the NFL's copyright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, neo_prankster said:

Outrageous in what ways?


Outrageous because the NFL not only has the moral right to defend its trademarks, it has a legal obligation to do so.

 

Calling that obligation “bullying” or “crushing” the people who infringed upon their property is just silly hyperbole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/10/2021 at 8:04 AM, CrimsonBull9584 said:

NFL doesn't respect their fans' intelligence do they?


How is this a surprise? Also, why should they? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gothamite said:

NFL not only has the moral right to defend its trademarks

the NFL okayed a move of a pro sports franchise that was vital to its community, and as a Houstonian, I can solidly say that I will never purchase a licensed piece of Oilers memorabilia as long as I know that it will be partially shared revenue with the Titans organization. The NFL has fallen ass-backwards into a situation where they failed to recognize and properly capitalize on the history and identity that a lot of people related to within Houston, and only have themselves to blame. Morally, the NFL has offered no recompense to the city of Houston, so they shouldn't have the right to get mad when a team in a spring league galvanizes interest and creates a brand that can stand on its own, regardless of the inspiration. Personally, I believe that the logos do not cause confusion because they are both recognized as separate in the suggested market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

On 1/10/2021 at 11:04 AM, CrimsonBull9584 said:

So the NFL's argument is that football fans can't tell the difference between the logos of an NFL team that hasn't been around since 1998 and a new XFL team?

 

56 minutes ago, FiddySicks said:

How is this a surprise? Also, why should they? 

 

It isn't the NFL that thought they could get away with stealing somebody else's property...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Htown1141 said:

the NFL okayed a move of a pro sports franchise that was vital to its community, and as a Houstonian, I can solidly say that I will never purchase a licensed piece of Oilers memorabilia as long as I know that it will be partially shared revenue with the Titans organization. The NFL has fallen ass-backwards into a situation where they failed to recognize and properly capitalize on the history and identity that a lot of people related to within Houston, and only have themselves to blame. Morally, the NFL has offered no recompense to the city of Houston, so they shouldn't have the right to get mad when a team in a spring league galvanizes interest and creates a brand that can stand on its own, regardless of the inspiration. Personally, I believe that the logos do not cause confusion because they are both recognized as separate in the suggested market.

 

I understand the pain of losing a team.  But hurt feelings do not change intellectual property laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.