College Football 2023

[kb105]

1 hour ago, MJWalker45 said:

Uniforms cannot be copyrighted or trademarked. Colors cannot be trademarked either, though Nike's been trying to create a version of kelly green that is theirs alone to control. If that were the case  there are a lot of schools in Ohio that would have to change their uniforms because they look too much like the Browns. 

Based on the two jerseys being worn, you can't even say they are the same design. The only things that are the same are the closeness of the colors and the template used. The two blues are not even a match as you can see by looking at the helmet stripes. And the pants are obviously not the same. 

 

I am definitely not defending the NFL's decision here to not allow a Houston based college team wear a tribute uniform to a formerly Houston-based pro team. However, this article is where it says the Oilers uniforms are trademarked. Whether that is true or not, I don't know, but one wrinkle I hadn't seen in other articles is that the NFL had warned UH prior to wearing them against UTSA and the Cougars still wore them. As I mentioned in my previous post, the NFL is obligated to vigorously defend intellectual properties in order to maintain possession and protections, which even though the uniforms are not identical they are close enough to create obvious confusion on top of many media sites and handles calling them Oilers-inspired or even directly 'Luv Ya Blue' uniforms and them advertising a ticket package as the 'Love You Houston package'. Again, I'm not saying I like the C&D being used by the NFL, but it makes sense, especially when UH could have easily asked for permission and even possibly partnered with the NFL and Nike for something like auctioning jerseys for a non-profit or scholarships for the school.

[MJWalker45]

2 minutes ago, kb105 said:

I am definitely not defending the NFL's decision here to not allow a Houston based college team wear a tribute uniform to a formerly Houston-based pro team. However, this article is where it says the Oilers uniforms are trademarked. Whether that is true or not, I don't know, but one wrinkle I hadn't seen in other articles is that the NFL had warned UH prior to wearing them against UTSA and the Cougars still wore them. As I mentioned in my previous post, the NFL is obligated to vigorously defend intellectual properties in order to maintain possession and protections, which even though the uniforms are not identical they are close enough to create obvious confusion on top of many media sites and handles calling them Oilers-inspired or even directly 'Luv Ya Blue' uniforms and them advertising a ticket package as the 'Love You Houston package'. Again, I'm not saying I like the C&D being used by the NFL, but it makes sense, especially when UH could have easily asked for permission and even possibly partnered with the NFL and Nike for something like auctioning jerseys for a non-profit or scholarships for the school.

I don't think Houston should have to ask permission to change up their uniforms. I also don't think the NFL would have signed off if the uniforms were auctioned off afterwards. If Iowa didn't change into the look based on the Steelers until this year would they be getting the same stick from the league? I know team colors aren't the issue in that case, but in this regard the NFL is the neighbor who's yelling at kids to get off the lawn of the people across the street from them because one of the kids has the same hat his kid does.

[PERRIN]

2 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

 Colors cannot be trademarked either

Specific Pantone shades can be copyrighted, as stupid as it is. Companies like T Mobile, the Home Depot, and UPS have trademarked their specific shades. I don't think the NFL can legally trademark an entire color scheme though, especially one as common as powder blue and red. Unless they make a logo out of a stripe and copyright that, like Adidas for example, I don't think they can copyright the Oilers' uniform striping either. It'd be pretty scummy of the NFL to sue Houston for simply paying homage to a hometown team like plenty of other schools have done before.

[TGroce]

I LOVE these

 

[cajunaggie08]

Just now, TGroce said:

I LOVE these

 

Amy Adams Strunk thinks thats her family's blue.

[cajunaggie08]

Rice teasing a new helmet

 

[GriffinM6]

1 hour ago, TGroce said:

I LOVE these

 

These are way better than the black or grey ones. Tennessee has only worn the traditional orange jersey how many times this year though?

[WBeltz]

1 hour ago, cajunaggie08 said:

Amy Adams Strunk thinks thats her family's blue.

It's not Luv Ya Blue and Red tho, so the NFL can't C&D

[upperV03]

Those baby blue Tennessee uniforms aren’t real.

[TGroce]

noooooooo

[GelatinousLimes]

Seeing as that was from an AI generated "Every SEC Team in Baby Blue" post, I highly doubt that to be accurate.  

[tBBP]

22 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

Uniforms cannot be copyrighted or trademarked. Colors cannot be trademarked either, though Nike's been trying to create a version of kelly green that is theirs alone to control. If that were the case  there are a lot of schools in Ohio that would have to change their uniforms because they look too much like the Browns. 

 

Oh yes they can. Once you understand how IP legalese works, it'll make sense. In short:

 

Trademarks indicate the origin or the source i.e. the Houston Oilers derrick logo was created by them (or someone they hired to create it by them). Copyrights protect original creative expressions. Both protections are forms of intellectual property (along with patents, for what that's worth). The key word in that is "original".

 

Let's talk colors first. IF it is a unique enough tint or shade of a color, a company can apply for copyright protection. This is where we find UPS' specific hue of brown (called "Pullman Brown" or more commonly "UPS Brown") and T-Mobile's magenta color. (Sidebar, but a couple years back T-Mobile actually tried claiming trademarks on adjoining hues of magenta; I don't remember if that case ever went anywhere.) This is actually much of the reason some companies (and I've noticed this more with sports teams lately) will try to brand themselves with some unique color that they can, quite literally, own. If, say, the Seattle Seahawks wanted to trademark their Action Green (which for all I know they probably already have), they could apply and probably be approved. The key is identifying the specific hue, including the RGB, CMYK and hexcode formula.

 

As for color combinations, uniform designs, wordmarks, fonts (if it applies), striping patterns/designs...that all falls under the "original creative expression" provision. First, it protects the research and development that goes/went into it; second, it protects the expression itself. Here's where we find the Houston Oilers colors and uniforms. Now they may not own the striping pattern itself, but that combination of colors, and the stripe itself applied to that uniform design, is a different story. All this really becomes a problem if another entity attempts to make money off a design that's not originally theirs. (I don't know if UH intended to sell those jerseys or not, though.) But to prevent things from even going that far, the NFL can (and did in this case) send a C&D over. Why? Let's say UH attempted to profit in some way off the "image and likeness" of the Oilers brand (which, let's be real, that's exactly what they tried to do, even if the exact shades of blue and proportions of stripes weren't the same between UH's alts and the Oiler's throwbacks—it's clear what they were trying to emulate). That's where the trouble comes in. And speaking if possible differences in fabric color, there is some variance to this, too (hence why T-Mobile tried claiming adjacent tints/shades/hues of magenta in protecting their trademark and thus their brand).

 

Just a funny related memory to all of this: those of us old enough to have seen it happen may remember when Al Davis went on a binge trying to sue the Buccaneers (and anyone else within earshot, lol) over their use of pewter and black after the '97 rebrand, claiming those colors were too identical to the Raiders' "iconic" silver and black. Had Tampa stuck to simply pewter and black (and let's all be glad they didn't), Davis might have had a case. But since no one on planet Earth is gonna mistake the Buccaneers for the Raiders, dude had no shot at winning any damages. (Tangentially related, but this may also partly factor into Shahid Khan's decision to ultimately keep the teal in thr Jaguars' color scheme...at one point early on in his ownership tenure he flirted with 86ing teal and making the team strictly black and gold, in which case the Saints may have had a decent case on their hands.)

 

[colinturner95]

8 hours ago, TGroce said:

I LOVE these

 

The arm sleeve is six degrees of messed up and the SEC patch doesn't even say SEC. 

[TGroce]

I realize that. Now. Haha, still aesthetically solid, though.

[TenaciousG]

Human: Ok, AI, please make an image that looks very realistic.

AI: Done, what else do you want me to do?

Human: Can you add words or letters to the image?

AI: EI WE HEDKLEINSJSHHJS

[Mingjai]

On 10/30/2023 at 1:40 PM, MJWalker45 said:

Uniforms cannot be copyrighted or trademarked. Colors cannot be trademarked either, though Nike's been trying to create a version of kelly green that is theirs alone to control. If that were the case  there are a lot of schools in Ohio that would have to change their uniforms because they look too much like the Browns. 

 

 

Based on the two jerseys being worn, you can't even say they are the same design. The only things that are the same are the closeness of the colors and the template used. The two blues are not even a match as you can see by looking at the helmet stripes. And the pants are obviously not the same. 

 

 

The primary reason the NFL would send a cease and desist letter would be to preserve its rights--in the end, they might not file an action against the school. But they do need to send the letter, otherwise they might be prevented from asserting those rights down the road.

 

Not to go too far into the weeds on this one, but based on my experience working in IP damages consulting, my opinion is that the NFL would actually have a pretty good case trademark infringement on this (but there would be some hurdles to overcome). The standard for trademark infringement is not whether the mark has been copied or appears identical, but whether there is likelihood of confusion (not actual confusion), which I think would be pretty easy to show in this case. (As an aside, I think an action for trademark dilution would also be a pretty straightforward case as well.)

 

The biggest issue for the NFL would be demonstrating they own valid trademark on the uniforms.  Since color and uniforms can be trademarked, especially in combination--i.e., a trademark covering this specific uniform design in these specific colors-- it is very possible they have trademark rights.  Ideally (from the NFL's standpoint), they would have a registered mark for this color/uniform design combo.  That would put the burden on the school to demonstrate invalidity.

 

The reason we don't see more cases like this is that teams and leagues didn't historically treat their specific colors and uniforms as trademarks in the past, so they would be prevented by principles of equity from asserting their trademarks now against teams who already use the same colors and uniforms. But, in this case U of Houston has no history of using these uniforms and colors, so the NFL would have less to worry about the equitable issues. 

[VikWings]

delete.

[upperV03]

The Ducks are going chrome/nightmare green/nightmare green vs. Cal:

 

I was under the impression that the nightmare green unis were going to be worn next week vs. USC, so I think there may have been an audible here. I was expecting black/yellow/black this week, but I think that may be pushed to next week to avoid two straight weeks of wearing black helmets and pants (wore black/white/black last week). Have to say that these are my least favorite set so far this year. The chrome domes worked in the 2020 Rose Bowl when they went with this combo because the helmets had nightmare green wings & masks. They don’t work this time around with silver wings and facemasks. These nightmare unis also look way more brown in the sun than the ‘19/20 versions did.

[Green27]

Cougs going matte grey, crimson and white this weekend vs Stanford.

Florida breaking out the black with a Vetrans Day theme

Cincy also doing a military tribute

 

[kb105]

UCF pairs their ‘Lightmode’ jersey with a gold helmet with the Script Knights decals. I think this the first gold helmet combo with their new script logo.