Nike Sued Over Michael Jordan Logo

[BrokenVisage]

they'll settle for millions in the end.

 

[smackababy]

The pose is not similar enough, IMO. Claiming that he "invented" Jordan jumping with his legs open and dunking with his right hand, to the point that he owns the rights to any photo with those elements isn't going to hold up IMO. He also waited like 20+ years to bring this to court. The original contract expired in like 1987. Why not go after it then? Oh, that's right, he wants money.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

The pose is not similar enough, IMO. Claiming that he "invented" Jordan jumping with his legs open and dunking with his right hand, to the point that he owns the rights to any photo with those elements isn't going to hold up IMO. He also waited like 20+ years to bring this to court. The original contract expired in like 1987. Why not go after it then? Oh, that's right, he wants money.

You're just not paying attention here.

Nike paid him to use that logo on two occasions. That demonstrates that they knew full well that it's his property. They can't claim otherwise now.

The original contract expired, yet Nike continued to use the logo. If they needed a contract to use it previously they would need a new contract to keep using it once the original expired. They used it sans contract, so they're hosed.

Yes, he wants money. And he's entitled to money for getting ripped off for the last 25 years. He's going to get a lot of it.

 

[smackababy]

You're just not paying attention here.

Nike paid him to use that logo on two occasions. That demonstrates that they knew full well that it's his property. They can't claim otherwise now.

The original contract expired, yet Nike continued to use the logo. If they needed a contract to use it previously they would need a new contract to keep using it once the original expired. They used it sans contract, so they're hosed.

Yes, he wants money. And he's entitled to money for getting ripped off for the last 25 years. He's going to get a lot of it.

Except, similar to what happened to MS and some XML suit, the plaintiff was aware the Logo was being infringed upon and waited to bring suit for years. He willingly choose not to defend his right to the image for like 25 years. He won't win.

And, Nike didn't use his shot for the logo. They might have paid him simply as a "sure, whatever, it's only $15,000" and later realized they didn't need to. But, that is for a judge to decide.

Personally, the idea that this guy owns the rights to photos of Jordan dunking in a similar manner is ludicrous.

 

[DrPizza]

*sigh*
The play on words wasn't appreciated.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Except, similar to what happened to MS and some XML suit, the plaintiff was aware the Logo was being infringed upon and waited to bring suit for years. He willingly choose not to defend his right to the image for like 25 years. He won't win.

Unless Microsoft was involved in two XML suits you're grossly mistaken. Please link to XML suit where MS won because the only one I can find they got their asses kicked, lost on appeal and had to pay hundreds of millions.

*sigh*
The play on words wasn't appreciated.

Just too subtle I guess.

 

[Red Squirrel]

The pose is not similar enough, IMO. Claiming that he "invented" Jordan jumping with his legs open and dunking with his right hand, to the point that he owns the rights to any photo with those elements isn't going to hold up IMO. He also waited like 20+ years to bring this to court. The original contract expired in like 1987. Why not go after it then? Oh, that's right, he wants money.

Copyright law is retarded, sadly it probably will hold up.

 

[Rakehellion]

Hey guys, check out this completely original cartoon character I drew called Mackey the Badger. I know what you're thinking, but it's in a slightly different pose so I'm not violating anyone's intellectual property rights.

 

[SunnyD]

*sigh*
The play on words wasn't appreciated.

Yes, yes it was. :awe:

IMHO, Rentmeester's pic looks significantly different than Jumpman. The poses are completely different, and the artistic styles are completely different. Jumpman looks like he's blocking a shot/rebounding honestly, Rentmeester's shot looks like he's taking an alleyoop dunk in a derpy moment, not to mention that the shot wasn't silhouetted in the first place.

It's akin to a baroque musician suing AC/DC over Back In Black because music.

The suit is without merit, but subject to interpretation just as any "art" is.

 

[Rakehellion]

Jumpman looks like he's blocking a shot/rebounding honestly

Jumpman is intended to look like he's dunking. Everyone else can see it. Your opinion is retarded and you're retarded.

 

[Reasonable Doubt]

Hey guys, check out this completely original cartoon character I drew called Mackey the Badger. I know what you're thinking, but it's in a slightly different pose so I'm not violating anyone's intellectual property rights.