NFL logo copyrights

[seahawk9]

Aren't NFL logos copyrighted ? I've seen several over the years where high schools and junior colleges use NFL logos as their own. Seen high schools use old Buccaneer logos, colts, jaguars, panthers, etc. They may not be using the NFL colors but they are the logos without any variation. What's the deal ?????

[BBTV]

These schools are setting the example for their students that it is better to rip-off other people's work, than to actually spend time and / or money doing it the right way. Yet if any of the players on these teams got caught turning in somebody else's work, they'd be in a lot of trouble. Makes perfect sense... I guess.

[scraw28]

usualy high schools and jucos ask the nfl and the respective team permission and they usually get it

[Brave-Bird 08]

do they? or is it on such a small scale that they get away with it?

[Brauny1280]

A few years ago an area school (SW Kansas) was using a recolored version of the Broncos current logo. Somehow Denver got word of it and made them stop. The main reasoning I heard was they changed the colors (a yellow mane instead of the orange). I think there is a few bits of apparrell floating around with that logo and the full horse alternate logo too. They don't use the logo on their football helmets anymore though.

As far as high schools using a college or pro logo. I don't see the big deal as long as they are making profit off of merchandising. A lot of schools, specifically small ones, have a small budget that gets little to no support from boosters. They just can't afford to create an unique identity.

[BBTV]

A few years ago an area school (SW Kansas) was using a recolored version of the Broncos current logo. Somehow Denver got word of it and made them stop. The main reasoning I heard was they changed the colors (a yellow mane instead of the orange). I think there is a few bits of apparrell floating around with that logo and the full horse alternate logo too. They don't use the logo on their football helmets anymore though.

As far as high schools using a college or pro logo. I don't see the big deal as long as they are making profit off of merchandising. A lot of schools, specifically small ones, have a small budget that gets little to no support from boosters. They just can't afford to create an unique identity.

I have a small budget for food. I just can't afford to buy bread. By your reasoning, I'm allowed to go into the grocery store and just steal it.

It's setting a horrible example for the kids, and frankly, is illegal. If no permission is explicitly granted (and I think it's crap to use an existing mark even with permission, but at least it's legal) then there is NO excuse to use someone else's logo. None. To argue otherwise is to advocate theft.

[Bleujayone]

I think some of you are looking at this as if it were your logo creation ripped off and used without permission. Take a step back for a moment, this isn't about someone ripping off a designer of their hard work, it's about a school adopting a logo that is very obvious to all where it comes from and integrating it harmlessly into their identity.

We're not talking about colleges and universities who stand to make millions in merchandising, tickets and television rights every year. We're talking about high school programs, most of which nowadays have to charge students and parents for the opportunity to even have a program. It is extremely rare and unlikely that a high school program make an actual profit, but if it did decided to make a merchandising empire for the purpose of profit, that would probably be the only time I might side with the professional holders of the copyrights.

What's more- the vast majority of NFL logos are now in fact available at many sporting good outlets both online and in stores- and yes you can get them in your school colors. The older logos that have been replaced by newer ones are more likely to be found. I believe the NFL realized there was something positive about having some variance of their product brands out there, and I believe by and large the NFL tends to look the other way in these matters- again as long as the teams involved are non-profit. This seems to include pee-wee, high school, jr colleges, and semi-pro teams. In a way, allowing this is a way to keep the NFL in the public conscience- a sort of altered advertising if you will.

A few years back MLB decided it would be a good idea to charge a fee to Little League teams that used their logos for their uniforms. To my knowledge that move was a public relations disaster. MLB came off as looking like a money grubber going after the very fan base they would hope someday might grow up to become paying customers. I do not recall if they finally repealed this moronic policy, but I do remember several Little League teams ditching their MLB monikers. It was a lose-lose situation all around.

[oldschoolvikings]

I always thought that the NFL was now very careful with newer logos, and you're less likely to see, say, the Jag's cat head on a high school helmet, but 30 / 40 years ago everything was more lax. Locally, I see two teams with horseshoes on their helmets, and one with a lightning bolt (in blue and gold, even!). I just got back from visiting the in-laws in Cincinnati. They live near Cincinnati Princeton High School, and they have the Minnesota Viking's Norseman head logo plastered everywhere. Its exact except the colors are red, black, and silver (kinda cool looking, honestly).

Here's a question... once you've kinda let your logo "get out there" without protecting your copywrite, can you then go back and fight for it? Or is it too late?

[BBTV]

I think some of you are looking at this as if it were your logo creation ripped off and used without permission. Take a step back for a moment, this isn't about someone ripping off a designer of their hard work, it's about a school adopting a logo that is very obvious to all where it comes from and integrating it harmlessly into their identity.

Are you serious? Adding something that is "obvious to all where it comes from" to your identity means that you have no identity. The fact that these are usually well-known logos is irrelevant to the discussion. I'll keep stating that it teaches a horrible lesson to the kids on these teams, and reflects poorly on the schools. If you can't draw up a logo, or pay to have one done, just use letters. At least you aren't stealing those.

If the leagues have explicitly stated that they're OK with this kind of thing, then I'm not as upset with the schools, though I still think it's not the best solution. Too often though, as we've seen with the Motion W, the high schools just think that they're entitled to use these marks, and I hope that each of them pays for that. I don't feel like the major leagues, or even colleges, should allow anyone to just take their identifying marks for their purposes. It's too bad that people in this country don't feel that it's stealing unless you physically take something from somewhere, or break into a physical building to get something.

[Gothamite]

Here's a question... once you've kinda let your logo "get out there" without protecting your copywrite, can you then go back and fight for it? Or is it too late?

I don't know, but I it is. Once the Bronco is out of the barn, so to speak, it's hard to put back in. That's why Wisconsin fights so hard to protect its "Motion W" logo.

I think some of you are looking at this as if it were your logo creation ripped off and used without permission. Take a step back for a moment, this isn't about someone ripping off a designer of their hard work, it's about a school adopting a logo that is very obvious to all where it comes from and integrating it harmlessly into their identity.

1. It doesn't have to be my car that's stolen for me to care about auto theft.

2. Even if ignorance were an excuse for stealing (which it isn't, receiving stolen property is a crime), I find it hard to believe that nobody associated with a high school in Kansas recognized the Denver Broncos logo.

A few years back MLB decided it would be a good idea to charge a fee to Little League teams that used their logos for their uniforms. To my knowledge that move was a public relations disaster. MLB came off as looking like a money grubber going after the very fan base they would hope someday might grow up to become paying customers. I do not recall if they finally repealed this moronic policy, but I do remember several Little League teams ditching their MLB monikers. It was a lose-lose situation all around.

You know what? MLB was right.

Where they erred might have been the level of payment required (which should not have been more than the merest token), but they have the right and the obligation to protect their intellectual property from all infringement, even cute neighborhoody infringement.

[officeglenn]

It may be simple to some what's right and what's wrong in situations like this, but it is up to the respective leagues to take action to protect their intellectual property. Take, for example, a story posted here about a month ago:

"The decision originated with Jefferson Parish School Board member Mark Morgan, whose district includes the Gretna magnet high school. Soon after Thomas Jefferson (H.S.) opened in 2006, Morgan realized the school had adopted both the colors and the logo from the NFL's Jacksonville Jaguars. He believed that could constitute a trademark infringement or at least could put the school at risk of a lawsuit.

Morgan also said the school had sold baseball caps with the Jacksonville Jaguars official logo at the Gretna Heritage Festival last fall, despite not having a licensing agreement or written consent from the National Football League.

Because students are intent on keeping the jaguar as the school mascot, it is necessary to get rid of the California blue color, which he believes most people associate with the NFL, Morgan said.

"I don't want to go down that road, " said Morgan, who is a lawyer. "The mission of this school is not to imitate the NFL or anyone else. The mission of this school is to be unique and creative."

However, NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said his organization is "deeply committed" to supporting youth football and does not have a problem with high school programs adopting and using NFL team logos.

"We simply ask that the schools do not alter or change the color of the logos, " he said. The organization also asks high schools not to sell merchandise in a manner that would lead fans to believe it is officially licensed by the NFL or the team, he said.

NFL attorneys have not been contacted by anyone from the school district, but they would be more than happy to discuss the matter with school officials, McCarthy said.

Morgan said he consulted School Board attorneys as well as a former law school colleague who worked for the New York Jets.

Emphasis mine.

[slapshot]

A lot of these high schools, small colleges and youth teams are just picking logos from their uniform suppliers' catalogs. It's hard to fault a high school team using a Philadelphia Eagles logo if the logo itself was offered by the supplier. The fault lies with the supplier, not the school.

It should not be the obligation of the school/team to check the lawful use of something they are legally purchasing from a vendor.

As far as the Little League/MLB situation, most teams that I see with MLB nicknames have official licensed apparel. The team names have ® or ? by the wordmarks, and most of the hats have the MLB logo (as part of some promotion between youth sports and the MLB). I don't know if the uniforms are made by Majestic or not, but I think they are licensed to be worn.

[pagan696]

my daughter's little league baseball jerseys are MLBs without the town name. does have the reg trademarks and the MLB/MiLB logo. i think MLB does a good bit to endorse their properties for the next gen ballers.

[quantum]

<snip>

It should not be the obligation of the school/team to check the lawful use of something they are legally purchasing from a vendor.

<snip>

It's funny you bring this up. If this is the case, there is no way a designer could create logos for businesses for as little as the market currently demands if the designer is on the hook for researching infringement. If the designer is responsible for it, there is no way a logo can be made for even as little as a few hundred dollars.

For the pro designers, who is responsible?

[Bleujayone]

Are you serious? Adding something that is "obvious to all where it comes from" to your identity means that you have no identity. The fact that these are usually well-known logos is irrelevant to the discussion. I'll keep stating that it teaches a horrible lesson to the kids on these teams, and reflects poorly on the schools. If you can't draw up a logo, or pay to have one done, just use letters. At least you aren't stealing those.

If the leagues have explicitly stated that they're OK with this kind of thing, then I'm not as upset with the schools, though I still think it's not the best solution. Too often though, as we've seen with the Motion W, the high schools just think that they're entitled to use these marks, and I hope that each of them pays for that. I don't feel like the major leagues, or even colleges, should allow anyone to just take their identifying marks for their purposes. It's too bad that people in this country don't feel that it's stealing unless you physically take something from somewhere, or break into a physical building to get something.

Apples and oranges-

If I steal your car, you are without a car. You then either have to recover the car or get a new one. In the meantime you are inconvenienced. Your day to day operations have been disrupted.

The debate here isn't if another business (sports or otherwise) is taking another business's idea or identity for the purposes of profit. This is simply for fun, nothing more. If a high school uses an NFL logo, the NFL team is in no way affected. There will not be people not going to the games, not buying their team's merchandise, nor not watching their games on television because a high school shares their logo on their football helmets. No one will see the Denver Broncos on TV and mistake them for a high school team in Kansas.....or vice versa. Exactly how is the NFL being harmed or otherwise damaged from a high school team using one of their teams' logos as their own? If the debate is simply out of principle, then it really isn't all that important. Sorry guys, but I see no real victims here, no damages, and therefore no real need for tempers flaring.

The point is the NFL, MLB or any other professional sports organization is not harmed either physically, financially or otherwise because a high school team adopts their moniker as their own. This debate is silly to say the least. If for some reason the said professional organization wishes acknowledgment that they are the holders of the copyright and allow its use by permission- fine. But let's be honest, no one is taking a financial hit from some high school using their moniker and wasting resources going after them, suing them and forcing them to either relinquish said logo or pay fees hurts them more than simply letting the matter slide could ever do.

[KrazyHorse]

Although our high school was basically using the Atlanta Falcons uni set, the school logo was something else entirely. All merchandise sold was the high school logo, not the helmet (Falcon) logo. I would think that the leagues are okay with the logos being used (free advertisement) as long as no one else is making money off of the logo.

[quantum]

Ultimately, the use of any property is dependent upon an agreement with the owner. Owners need to be careful about dilution of brand, which is why most will not allow another to use their logos, regardless of whether money is being made or not.

[OnWis97]

It's too bad that people in this country don't feel that it's stealing unless you physically take something from somewhere, or break into a physical building to get something.

I find myself fascinated by this. If I had a nickel for everyone I know that would be overwhelmed with guilt if they stole a candy bar yet feel none illegally downloading hundreds of songs...

They'd never steal one CD, but they'd download 10 off a file-sharing site for free.

Without rules regulating such things, there'd be no reason to produce logos, music, literature, movies, etc.

[BBTV]

Are you serious? Adding something that is "obvious to all where it comes from" to your identity means that you have no identity. The fact that these are usually well-known logos is irrelevant to the discussion. I'll keep stating that it teaches a horrible lesson to the kids on these teams, and reflects poorly on the schools. If you can't draw up a logo, or pay to have one done, just use letters. At least you aren't stealing those.

If the leagues have explicitly stated that they're OK with this kind of thing, then I'm not as upset with the schools, though I still think it's not the best solution. Too often though, as we've seen with the Motion W, the high schools just think that they're entitled to use these marks, and I hope that each of them pays for that. I don't feel like the major leagues, or even colleges, should allow anyone to just take their identifying marks for their purposes. It's too bad that people in this country don't feel that it's stealing unless you physically take something from somewhere, or break into a physical building to get something.

Apples and oranges-

If I steal your car, you are without a car. You then either have to recover the car or get a new one. In the meantime you are inconvenienced. Your day to day operations have been disrupted.

The debate here isn't if another business (sports or otherwise) is taking another business's idea or identity for the purposes of profit. This is simply for fun, nothing more. If a high school uses an NFL logo, the NFL team is in no way affected. There will not be people not going to the games, not buying their team's merchandise, nor not watching their games on television because a high school shares their logo on their football helmets. No one will see the Denver Broncos on TV and mistake them for a high school team in Kansas.....or vice versa. Exactly how is the NFL being harmed or otherwise damaged from a high school team using one of their teams' logos as their own? If the debate is simply out of principle, then it really isn't all that important. Sorry guys, but I see no real victims here, no damages, and therefore no real need for tempers flaring.

The point is the NFL, MLB or any other professional sports organization is not harmed either physically, financially or otherwise because a high school team adopts their moniker as their own. This debate is silly to say the least. If for some reason the said professional organization wishes acknowledgment that they are the holders of the copyright and allow its use by permission- fine. But let's be honest, no one is taking a financial hit from some high school using their moniker and wasting resources going after them, suing them and forcing them to either relinquish said logo or pay fees hurts them more than simply letting the matter slide could ever do.

You're right, the debate is silly. It's a black and white situation, and I'm shocked that any member of these boards doesn't see it that way. I suppose you feel that downloading music isn't stealing either, right?

The point has already been made that if a company doesn't defend it's trademarks, it loses its right to do so. Once a team allows x number of schools (or, to Slapshot's point, logo catalogs who supply to schools) to get away with this (without permission, of course), it could lose its legal right to protect against you or me making products that use their logo (provided those products don't infringe on other contracts, like jerseys, in which case Reebok could come after us.)

You're basically saying that it's not a big deal because they're stealing from big corporations who will continue to operate despite the theft. I just cannot see that point of view, and I'd be surprised if you're not in the minority there.

[fkaKrock5cent]

These schools are setting the example for their students that it is better to rip-off other people's work, than to actually spend time and / or money doing it the right way. Yet if any of the players on these teams got caught turning in somebody else's work, they'd be in a lot of trouble. Makes perfect sense... I guess.

*Note, I play football for a school that uses the Saints logo for it's football "identity"*

I'll be honest when I tell you, most players don't care. All we care about is the game it's self. We'll talk once and awhile about the uniforms but it really isn't setting the school on fire that we use the saints logo. Think about yourself in high school, did you care deeply about the logo on the helmet's of the football team? Besides that, the school I go to is privet and I think we have bigger issues than the logo on our football helmets.

I see how it's ironic but spare us the "do it for the children" act.