OT: USC vs USC trademark lawsuit
Scott Edelman, an attorney representing the Los Angeles university, hailed the ruling as protection of the school's "primary athletic mark" used on team clothing and equipment that brings in significant revenue. Sports logo registrations are not limited to use in team colors, so there was potential for South Carolina merchandise to be mistaken for that of USC, Edelman said. He also suggested that the letters were more deservedly linked to the Trojans' warrior image than to "a goofy little chicken."This seems totally ridiculous to me, but it also reminds me of the lawsuit Wisconsin had a few years ago with a high school team. (HT: Kendall Rogers)
January 21st, 2010 at 5:57 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 6:16 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 9:49 PM ^
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:14 AM ^
January 22nd, 2010 at 1:05 AM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 6:10 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 7:02 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 8:53 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 10:09 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 11:42 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 11:51 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 10:06 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 8:01 PM ^
January 22nd, 2010 at 9:17 AM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 6:10 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 6:52 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 6:24 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 7:01 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 7:55 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 8:55 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 9:19 PM ^
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:16 AM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 10:27 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 11:02 PM ^
January 21st, 2010 at 10:35 PM ^