Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>"Saw 'em off," a logo often seen printed on T-shirts and other apparel, is at the center of a legal dispute between the University of Texas and a College Station merchant.The UT Board of Regents filed a formal legal complaint against College Station-based Aggieland Outfitters and its parent company, Kalcorp Enterprises, for manipulating the UT longhorn silhouette on the products."Defendants' unauthorized use of UT Marks complained herein is likely to cause confusion, to cause mistake, or to deceive customers," wrote Louis T. Pirkey, an attorney representing the Board of Regents, in the complaint.Merchandise with the logo has been sold since 1997, and there have not been any complaints, until now, said Fadi Kalaouze, owner of Aggieland Outfitters and Kalcorp.Kalaouze attempted to trademark the logo, but was denied by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office."The similarities among the marks and the goods are so great to create a likelihood of confusion," according to the final action of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.Kalaouze said he holds "seven copyrights with the longhorn at different angles."The suit was filed Dec. 4, just days after Texas A&M had beaten UT in football on Nov. 24.". . . UT's complaint is a legally baseless display of poor sportsmanship," according to Kalcorp's motion to dismiss.Both the office of the Board of Regents and the public affairs office at UT were contacted, but neither was available for comment.</div>linkFor those of you that don't get it, texas, which some refer to as UT, and Texas A&M have had a rivalry for a long, long time. The texas longhorn happens to be trademarked by texas. The problem in suing over it is that the suit is completely baseless and frivolous. The shirts the guy are selling are obviously similar, but also a clear parody. The guy has been selling these shirts for nearly a decade. A person would have to be utterly retarded (then again, it is texas... maybe I'm giving them too much credit) to get the two logos confused. It's pretty clear that texas was pissy after we beat them in football, so they decided to sue someone with less money than them for no reason.The owner of the store made a pretty good comment:<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>"This is a part of cherished rivalry between two great schools," he said. "The problem is UT has too many lawyers trying to justify their jobs."</div>texas should try spending their time making their school better instead of trying to bring ours down.
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. it's just as stupid as you damn aggies crying over the seahawks using the 12th man bs
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (koopa @ Jan 23 2007, 12:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>it's just as stupid as you damn aggies crying over the seahawks using the 12th man bs</div>That's completely different. They weren't parodying anything at all. There is no difference between using the term "12th Man" in college football and using the term "12th Man" in the NFL. It's the same term used in the same context. There's no question that there is copyright infringement in that case. The Seahawks fans may consider themselves the 12th Man if they'd like, but the organization may not use the term for sales or advertising. The difference is pretty obvious. We also don't have any beef with the Seahawks. I'm pretty sure we don't have any reason to spite them. On the other hand, we caused your team to lose consideration for the BCS AND had your QB carted off on a stretcher. Any reason to be bitter there? I'd think so.Using a parody in a product is not uncommon. Saturday Night Live does it all the time. The Daily Show and Colbert Report do it all the time. Mad Magazine does it all the time. I'm pretty sure when people tune into those shows and read that magazine, they don't confuse it for reality. In the same respect, I'm pretty sure that no one is going to buy a maroon shirt with a broken-horned longhorn on it, thinking it's a pro-Longhorns shirt. You would have to be a complete idiot. And that is exactly what texas' lawyers are contending; that their fanbase is too dumb to know the difference. I'd be insulted if I were you.edit: the Spurs suck
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. ^It is the same thing.Justice...I don't know if you know this, but I'm a Texas guy...I hat the Faggies, er...I mean, the Aggies with a passion.While this is probably stupid for Texas to do, JUST LIKE THE WHOLE "12TH Man" suit, there shouldn't even be a topic about this at all.Yeah, the Horns and Aggies hate each other...but they aren't suing because they are sore losers and lost their game against the Aggies...that's just ridicilous.Get off your Texas hate, especially if you're going to act like there's a difference between what the Aggies did, and what the Longhorns are doing.I'm sure there is legal backing in this matter, just like there was in ya'lls "frivilous" suit as well.
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. I don't hate the people or the school. I do hate that they are targeting a particularly poorer owner of a business for no reason.Tell me, can you not tell the difference between this logo:and this logo:You don't seem to know the meaning of the term frivolous. We won our case, which inherently means it wasn't frivolous. We had a legal claim, we pursued it, and we won. It was clear cut, and there was no question of whether or not it was legal for the Seahawks to use it.I couldn't care less about whether I feel the suit is "stupid" or not. texas has every right to protect its trademarks and copyrights just as we have the right to protect ours. The problem is that what they are suing over clearly isn't their mark. Can you not understand that?
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Jan 23 2007, 04:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That's completely different. They weren't parodying anything at all. There is no difference between using the term "12th Man" in college football and using the term "12th Man" in the NFL. It's the same term used in the same context. There's no question that there is copyright infringement in that case. The Seahawks fans may consider themselves the 12th Man if they'd like, but the organization may not use the term for sales or advertising. The difference is pretty obvious. We also don't have any beef with the Seahawks. I'm pretty sure we don't have any reason to spite them. On the other hand, we caused your team to lose consideration for the BCS AND had your QB carted off on a stretcher. Any reason to be bitter there? I'd think so.Using a parody in a product is not uncommon. Saturday Night Live does it all the time. The Daily Show and Colbert Report do it all the time. Mad Magazine does it all the time. I'm pretty sure when people tune into those shows and read that magazine, they don't confuse it for reality. In the same respect, I'm pretty sure that no one is going to buy a maroon shirt with a broken-horned longhorn on it, thinking it's a pro-Longhorns shirt. You would have to be a complete idiot. And that is exactly what texas' lawyers are contending; that their fanbase is too dumb to know the difference. I'd be insulted if I were you.edit: the Spurs suck</div>Longest post of all-time in the history of Justice on BBW.I think it's just a dumb overreaction by Texas. Nothing to get your undies in a bundle over.
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. <span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS">Fascinating. I really don't understand how the Spurs suck. They're a good team. May be old now, but still compiled of talented players.</span>
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SunnyD @ Jan 23 2007, 06:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Longest post of all-time in the history of Justice on BBW.I think it's just a dumb overreaction by Texas. Nothing to get your undies in a bundle over.</div>I don't know; I have made a few posts before that made fun of people that were pretty long and so on.It's not so much the suit in itself. It's the circumstances. There are other companies and organizations that use the "Saw 'em off" symbol. They've been doing it for years just as others have. Why choose this particular small business? It's also very curious timing. Hey, maybe it's not because of football, but the suit was filed a couple weeks after the game. Seems kinda odd, but it could be coincidence.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Illosophee @ Jan 23 2007, 07:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS">Fascinating. I really don't understand how the Spurs suck. They're a good team. May be old now, but still compiled of talented players.</span></div>I was just speaking to koopa on terms he could understand.Side note: we allowed the Seahawks to continue to use the term under the agreement that they would acknowledge the school. Doesn't seem too unreasonable to me.
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Marvinmartian @ Jan 24 2007, 05:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Frivilous...</div>Are you trying to say I'm spelling it wrong or just reiterating that you think our suit against the Seahawks was frivolous? You'd be wrong on both accounts.
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. You could explain why you think that rather than just trolling about it.http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=frivolous
Re: Wow, you're a real class act, texas. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>"This is a part of cherished rivalry between two great schools," he said. "The problem is UT has too many lawyers trying to justify their jobs."</div> So true. Go TA-M. Screw the Longhorns.
