how is this possible?

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

Pardon my ignorance about the legalities around trademarks and logo.

 

We know that the XFL's Houston Renegades had to abandon their original logo on account of a trademark dispute with the NFL and the Tennesee Titans, which own the Houston Oilers' logo.

 

 

 

But now we see that the IFL has a new team this year with this helmet logo.

 

 

 

 

That logo comes a lot closer to the Houston Oilers' helmet logo than the Renegades' logo did.  What's more, this IFL team is called the Tulsa Oilers.

 

How can a football team adopt the name "Oilers", and use that logo, without any complaint from the NFL?  It can't be because the IFL is too small to notice; we have seen explanations, on occasions when NFL teams and major colleges have gone after high schools, that a company is obligated to protect its marks or else risk losing them.

 

The NAL used to have a team called the Columbus Lions (that's Georgia), with this logo.

 

 

While that logo doesn't come all that close to the logo of the Detroit Lions, the colours are pretty close indeed.  The team was clearly invoking aspects of Detroit's look.

 

      

 

Then there were the Rochester Raiders, who played in a few leagues (including the IFL) for about a decade.  They used silver and black, and sported this logo.

 

 

 

There are more borderline cases.  A current IFL team part-owned by Marshawn Lynch is called the Bay Area Panthers, and this is its helmet logo.

 

 

Not close to the colours of Carolina.  But, still, a panther head that comes to a point on the bottom left.

 

I don't get how these for-profit companies can openly use these names and logos and can sell merchandise with these marks, without any objection from the NFL.

[PERRIN]

I think the main thing protecting these amateur league teams is the fact they play in lower-level leagues. They may be riffing off of NFL teams to some degree, but they're never gonna cause legitimate confusion in the same market due to the fact that barely anybody knows they exist. The Tulsa Oilers one might be close enough to warrant a lawsuit, not to mention there's a minor-league hockey team using that same name iirc, but the Bay Area Panthers and Columbus Lions are fine. The Panthers can't possibly claim copyright simply for sharing a name, and the logo is about as generic a Panther head logo as you can get. The Lions get the same pass in terms of the logo, and the Lions don't own silver and light blue, so they should also be fine. Even the Rochester Raiders, sharing name, colors, and logo concept, can probably get off scot-free due to lack of exposure. None of these minor-league teams are trying to compete with the NFL. The XFL and the Roughnecks, on the other hand, are directly mooching off of a historical brand whilst trying to compete directly with the NFL by being a professional-level league with ex-NFL players. It might be an arbitrary line deciding what is and isn't copyright infringement, but that's the most logical explanation I can think of.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

37 minutes ago, PERRIN said:

I think the main thing protecting these amateur league teams is the fact they play in lower-level leagues.

 

Thanks for the response.  But note that the IFL and NAL are not amateur leagues.  Those leagues' teams may pay their players peanuts; but the leagues still count as professional.

 

What's more, all those teams sell merchandise.  Is that not the bigger deal, in terms of infringing on trademarks?  

 

Also, what about the rationale that is employed when a non-profit institution such as a high school is prevented from using a logo, namely, that a trademark holder has to defend its mark?  I hope that one of the many people who are more informed than I am on the vexing question of trademarks can explain why the Tulsa Oilers and the Rochester Raiders are safe using barely-disguised NFL marks, but the Johnsonville High School Falcons or the St. Olaf High School Vikings (both of which are made-up examples) are not so safe.