Reporting companies profiting from player images
So, I was searching for specific images of Spike for a gif (forthcoming. It's taking a long time, for some reason), and the following link popped up on a Google search for "Spike Albrecht".
We both know that the NCAA and universities skirts this stuff by selling jerseys with numbers and no names, references to players statements that don't include direct quotes, etc. However, this is something entirely different. This actually has the kids face on it. They are profiting from his likeness, specifically. There can be no argument here. It's his face. It's on a shirt.
Who does one contact about something like this? Somebody needs to have their business sized by the FBI or the SEC or something, don't they?
April 18th, 2013 at 12:00 AM ^
Well now we all hafta buy it before you call mom and shut down the party before it even gets started
April 18th, 2013 at 12:03 AM ^
You really want some random shithead making money from Spike's picture when he's not allowed to do so himself? Cause that's what you just said.
April 18th, 2013 at 12:30 AM ^
Not only is it a shirt making money of an athlete who can't yet, it's also a shirt with just a clipping mask and text on it. You really want one?
Were you this angry when MGoBlog got busted for something similar?
Not speaking for that dude, but regarding the MGoBlog t-shirts:
A: I don't think MGoBlog was this eggregious. In fact, I know it wasn't.
B: I, personally, was pretty fine with the site having to pull the tshirts, though mostly because the player t-shirts were just dumb and not that clever. Add the fact that they're profiting directly off of student athletes and, yeah, it was a dumb decision one football pre-season.
C: I wonder if that's when Brian started to become a major proponent of paying players.
April 18th, 2013 at 12:02 AM ^
I would imagine it's civil not criminal.. but I don't know that for a fact.
April 18th, 2013 at 12:03 AM ^
April 18th, 2013 at 12:48 AM ^
April 18th, 2013 at 12:49 AM ^
the University owns your image while on scholarship. At the very least the University has an interest here because the Michigan "brand" is in full view.
I'm betting they get right on it.
One of the shirts just got sent to the boys down at the crime lab. They got 4 detectives working on the case. They got 'em workin in shifts.
I mean, it is BS that Spike can't make any money off of it, but I don't get why you're mad at some random t-shirt seller. You should be mad at the NCAA. Report it to them and they will probably get on it. They own this here town. You don't wanna know what the NCAA does when you step on their turf.
No, you should be mad at the t-shirt seller who is using someone's likeness without their permission. This isn't even totally an NCAA issue. If someone used your likeness without permission and was making money off of it, would you approve?
April 18th, 2013 at 12:12 PM ^
Actually, I wouldn't disapprove in this case. Not knowing what happens to profits already earned on shirts that aren't licensed, there seems to be two possibilities. First, the company keeps the profits and the shirts are simply taken off the market. Second, the NCAA gets to take the profits and give them to...themselves? Or the school involved in the design? Obviously it's not going to Spike. Either way, I'd argue Spike gets screwed, and in the second case, I'd argue he has a right to be mad at the NCAA. I believe you've argued differently before though.
Whether you agree or disagree about player compensation, if you were Spike, do you seriously think you would care if the profits from a t-shirt with your image went to the NCAA or to some random online t-shirt store? Hell, I'd assume the random internet store could use the money more.
Your question about my opinion of t-shirts with my likeness isn't relevant because I can do something about it. I would disapprove because I could sue them for a cut of the profits.
Actually there is a difference. When you sign for your scholarship you're also signing a big pile of legalese that (among other things) agrees that the school gets to use your likeness for the duration. If a player doesn't understand that, that's their problem: they're 18 and legally supposed to know. And if they're old enough to feel screwed by the NCAA, they ought to be old enough to understand the paper they signed. Nobody ever signs a deal with some random shithead t-shirt seller giving them the right as well.
April 18th, 2013 at 11:42 AM ^
I'd be kind of annoyed if someone was out there making money (esp. someone not affiliated with the University) knowing full well that I won't see a penny of it and if I tried to do something similar I would be banned from playing college basketball
If I was a freshman in college who all of a sudden had random people making t-shirts with my image on it, I know I'd think it was pretty sweet. Hell, I'd probably buy one.
I don't think these kids really care that much about stuff like that, especially the kids that aren't the "stars" per se. They never had any expectation of making a dime off of basketball and are just happy, I'm guessing, to be in the limelight.
They had to remove several items from the MGoStore for similar violations and neither were even using the actual photos.
Is that Taylor Lewan on the cover of HTTV?
the link you post is no good anymore. Good Job OP!
Damn what a problem. If only there existed a system that allowed players to profit off the likeness of their own images. Imagine if they then could pursue causes of action for infringement of their likeness through the legal system.
would be the Michigan Compliance folks in the AD's office.
http://www.mgoblue.com/compliance/
I note that it appears that this T-Shirt has been removed.
April 18th, 2013 at 11:31 AM ^
Blazefire to be Att'y General!
April 18th, 2013 at 11:39 AM ^
LB's Kickstarter for a 28th Amendment to make Attorney General an elected office.
/Constitution'd
April 18th, 2013 at 10:25 AM ^
1. It is now taken off
2. This opens up an interesting question........... Why not walk on and sell your own stuff. If you are not on scholarship you can work and or have businesses. Is this possible?
What would stop a walk on from licensing their own image to the school if they are not on scholarship.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:52 AM ^
it's an NCAA competition rule. Whether or not Devin is on scholarship, he can't put up a sign that says, "Get autographed pictures with Michigan Quarterback Devin Gardner, today at Briarwood for only $49.99" because the NCAA won't let him play after he does that. They would suspend him and make him pay his proceeds back, at least.
Second, the NCAA doesn't/can't stop athletes from working or having a business. Maybe it's impractical for a Michigan football player to have a part time job, maybe it's something the team doesn't endorse, it might even be an actual rule that Hoke has, but if Devin wants to get into giving QB lessons to middle and high school students or wants to moonlight at Cottage Inn, it's not the NCAA stopping him.
April 18th, 2013 at 11:50 AM ^
The NCAA doesn't stop a student athlete from getting a job, but they do care how much they make...
"While at work, the student athlete can earn up to $2,000 per year above the value of the full grant that is given to he or she while on scholarship."
"This means that if a football player works at a construction company, his earnings are not deducted from the football team's budget as long as his earnings don't exceed two thousand dollars more than what his full grant is worth."
http://technique.library.gatech.edu/issues/spring1998/may1/news2.html
April 18th, 2013 at 12:27 PM ^
According to Article 12.4 in the Division 1 Handbook, it looks like, hypothetically, if Devin had the assets and credit rating to do it, he could open a restauraunt or whatever, and he could give throwing lessons seven days a week with M Compliance needing to check a few boxes.
Proposition 62 looks like it wouldn't apply to partial scholarships, but if it does I definitely know that the $2,000 limit is gone.
April 18th, 2013 at 12:54 PM ^
Got it. It looks like they got rid of the cap right after I stopped playing.
April 18th, 2013 at 11:53 AM ^
Slow work computers, sorry for the double post.