BBTV Posted February 10, 2008 Share Posted February 10, 2008 I love how people get upset if someone steals their car, or money, or computer, etc., but these same people have no problem with logo / IP theft. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewharrington Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Good point. I read the bottom of the article, but I could have sworn this was a Joe Bosack. (BSU, I mean.) I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry [The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmered Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I love how people get upset if someone steals their car, or money, or computer, etc., but these same people have no problem with logo / IP theft.It's a perception shift that has to take place.People see the value in a car, but don't see the value in a logo or other IP, like MP3 songs or software.Same deal though, you can't use someone else's commercial brand to promote you own identity, especially one that they've paid 85 large to develop.And you're especially kidding yourself if you think making it face the othe way is going to cut it as a point of difference.Even if you are not a profitable business yet. Oh, and I've got a site.Footy Jumpers Dot Com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meetthemets Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I also love how the team says "it was not our intention to steal BSU's logo" even though that's exactly what it appears they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmered Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I also love how the team says "it was not our intention to steal BSU's logo" even though that's exactly what it appears they did."It?s a similar Bronco, but I think the head is facing the opposite direction," he said. ?All the copyright stuff was looked at prior to (using the new logo.)? Uh huh...So, basically, logos are unrecognisable from themselves if you flip them the other way.(Even though on a football helmet they face both ways.) Oh, and I've got a site.Footy Jumpers Dot Com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meetthemets Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I also love how the team says "it was not our intention to steal BSU's logo" even though that's exactly what it appears they did."It?s a similar Bronco, but I think the head is facing the opposite direction," he said. ?All the copyright stuff was looked at prior to (using the new logo.)? Uh huh...So, basically, logos are unrecognisable from themselves if you flip them the other way.(Even though on a football helmet they face both ways.)Sounds like the team is being run by a regular Albert Einstein. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmered Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I also love how the team says "it was not our intention to steal BSU's logo" even though that's exactly what it appears they did."It?s a similar Bronco, but I think the head is facing the opposite direction," he said. ?All the copyright stuff was looked at prior to (using the new logo.)? Uh huh...So, basically, logos are unrecognisable from themselves if you flip them the other way.(Even though on a football helmet they face both ways.)Sounds like the team is being run by a regular Albert Einstein. Maybe he's closer to Joe Theismann's "Norm Einstein". Oh, and I've got a site.Footy Jumpers Dot Com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbreadmann Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I also love how the team says "it was not our intention to steal BSU's logo" even though that's exactly what it appears they did."It?s a similar Bronco, but I think the head is facing the opposite direction," he said. ?All the copyright stuff was looked at prior to (using the new logo.)? Uh huh...So, basically, logos are unrecognisable from themselves if you flip them the other way.(Even though on a football helmet they face both ways.)Actually, as discussed earlier in the thread, that is their helmet logo so they have two different-facing versions. So they didn't even have to do as much work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I love how people get upset if someone steals their car, or money, or computer, etc., but these same people have no problem with logo / IP theft.It's a perception shift that has to take place.People see the value in a car, but don't see the value in a logo or other IP, like MP3 songs or software.Same deal though, you can't use someone else's commercial brand to promote you own identity, especially one that they've paid 85 large to develop.And you're especially kidding yourself if you think making it face the othe way is going to cut it as a point of difference.Even if you are not a profitable business yet.I don't get it either. Especially here - you'd think we as a group would give a damn about intellectual property.The Boise Broncos have a legal and moral obligation to put a stop to this. Theft is theft is theft. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therocheapproach Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Good point. I read the bottom of the article, but I could have sworn this was a Joe Bosack. (BSU, I mean.)It was Joe Bosack. Collegiate Licensing Co. is just a legal manager of the marks. Once the job closes for Bosack, it's up to BSU to maintain the rights and protect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leggman01 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Good point. I read the bottom of the article, but I could have sworn this was a Joe Bosack. (BSU, I mean.)It was Joe Bosack. Collegiate Licensing Co. is just a legal manager of the marks. Once the job closes for Bosack, it's up to BSU to maintain the rights and protect it.i think he's talking about the reference that North Charles Street Design Organization designed the logoif they did design the boise athletic logo, it was a lucky turn of the pencil...check out the athletic identities this group did for randolph and jacksonville episcopal...i think most of the "paint" designers on this site could do a better job - the work they've done with institutional identities is very nice, in my opinion, but their athletic work leaves much to be desiredhttp://www.ncsdo.com/site/portfolio/identi...tail.php?id=E09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meetthemets Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Good point. I read the bottom of the article, but I could have sworn this was a Joe Bosack. (BSU, I mean.)It was Joe Bosack. Collegiate Licensing Co. is just a legal manager of the marks. Once the job closes for Bosack, it's up to BSU to maintain the rights and protect it.i think he's talking about the reference that North Charles Street Design Organization designed the logoif they did design the boise athletic logo, it was a lucky turn of the pencil...check out the athletic identities this group did for randolph and jacksonville episcopal...i think most of the "paint" designers on this site could do a better job - the work they've done with institutional identities is very nice, in my opinion, but their athletic work leaves much to be desiredhttp://www.ncsdo.com/site/portfolio/identi...tail.php?id=E09Bosack did the athletic marks. These other guys did the institutional marks, it appears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I also love how the team says "it was not our intention to steal BSU's logo" even though that's exactly what it appears they did."It?s a similar Bronco, but I think the head is facing the opposite direction," he said. ?All the copyright stuff was looked at prior to (using the new logo.)? Uh huh...So, basically, logos are unrecognisable from themselves if you flip them the other way.(Even though on a football helmet they face both ways.)I'm not a lawyer or anything close to that, nor do I claim to know law (especially when it comes to trademarks and copyrights)....but I don't think stealing someone's logo and making it "face the OPPOSITE direction" completely validates the theft of said logo. The BSU logo faces the opposite direction on the other side of the helmet ( as rmered correctly mentioned in his post) does that mean that they only have exclusive rights to one side of the helmet? If that was the case then they need to pull a Steelers here and leave the other side blank. This is completely ridiculous. Who knows what BSU might do. Maybe they'll look at it as a minor thing and not take the time and/or money to pursue action; especially because the team is in another country and probably won't promote its stolen logo within the US or any other countries. I would imagine if that were the case then BSU would find it unnecessary to take legal action. I personally would take action just to take action and not let stuff like this slide. But again, I'm not a lawyer or anything remotely close to that...so what the hell do I know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 There's this mistaken belief that you can take somebody's existing design, change it 25% or 30% (the actual percentage varies based on who's doing the talking), and you can own the resulting design. That's probably what they're thinking with the flipped logo.The truth is that if you start with somebody else's intellectual property, no amount of changes can make it yours.?All the copyright stuff was looked at prior to (using the new logo.)?If true, they need better lawyers.I don't know how allowing a foreign entity to rip off your design impacts your rights. That's an interesting discussion. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 There's this mistaken belief that you can take somebody's existing design, change it 25% or 30% (the actual percentage varies based on who's doing the talking), and you can own the resulting design. That's probably what they're thinking with the flipped logo.The truth is that if you start with somebody else's intellectual property, no amount of changes can make it yours.?All the copyright stuff was looked at prior to (using the new logo.)?If true, they need better lawyers.I don't know how allowing a foreign entity to rip off your design impacts your rights. That's an interesting discussion.Again, I'm not a lawyer or anything close to that, but when it comes to copyrighting material on an international level things get really hairy. I don't think BSU would have a chance to be quite honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I'm not a lawyer either, but don't most Western countries recognize and honor each other's copyright laws? Otherwise you'd see a whole lot of bootleg merchandise in Canada. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I'm not a lawyer either, but don't most Western countries recognize and honor each other's copyright laws? Otherwise you'd see a whole lot of bootleg merchandise in Canada.Who says that you don't. There's plenty of bootleg stuff from Canada and all over the world. Thats why we need to watch out for them there Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenatorJake Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Okay... obviously the Kamloops logo is a blatant and unimaginative rip-off of the BSU Broncos. That being said, without infringing on any copyright laws, isn't the BSU identity a blatant rip-off of the Denver Broncos?Same colours. Same name.Very similar uniforms.Everything is stolen nowadays... why the fax machine is nothing but a waffle iron with a telephone attached to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewharrington Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 After doing a little research, you would find:Different colors: Royal blue is different than navy blue, and different uniforms: See below. I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry [The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SenatorJake Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Nonetheless... the similarities are there. You can't deny that. As a matter of fact, I remember a time when the Denver Broncos did use that type of blue, abeit with orange as their main colour.Maybe it isn't a direct rip-off, like what Kamloops did to BSU... but I think the BSU identity is very much inspired by Denver's identity.Hey... if I had a football team called the Ottawa 49ers and they wore red and gold, even with slightly different shading, what would you think? You'd probably say: "How uninspired." That's kind of what I'm saying here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.