Skip to comments.Why can't you call it the Super Bowl? (Can't call it the Superbowl)
Posted on 01/31/2014 4:15:10 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
ou've probably heard a bunch of local tire shops, strip clubs, and stereo stores promoting half-assed sales this weekend by alluding to some sort of championship football game, but not actually coming out and saying "The Super Bowl."
I, for one, am in favor of a strip club exemption for all copyright infringements as a blanket provision, but that's neither here nor there. The fact is, most companies are not allowed to use the phrases "Super Bowl" or "Super Sunday," both of which have been copyrighted by the NFL.
The NFL's lawyers have gone after big and small targets alike (from The Motley Fool):
A classic example occurred in 2007 leading up to Super Bowl XLI between the Indianapolis Colts and the Chicago Bears when the NFL sent a cease and desist letter to an Indiana church group that had advertised its party with an intent to charge admission. The letter led to several other church groups around the country to stop similar activities, the exact effect the NFL was seeking.
(Excerpt) Read more at sbnation.com ...
Why would anyone watch this nonsense?
I am proud to say that never in my life have I ever even walked by a TV set that had the Super Bowl on.
Not copyright, but trademark. FWIW.
A distinction with little difference.
JOE DON LOONEY,
the great philosopher and former NFL player, elephant dung cleaner, once opined.
“HOW CAN YOU CALL IT THE GREATEST EVENT IN HISTORY IF IT HAPPENS EVERY YEAR”?
“HOW CAN YOU CALL IT THE SUPER BOWL WHEN COUNTLESS MILLIONS OF CHINESE DO NOT EVEN KNOW IT EXISTS”?
I make the morning’s first cup of coffee, grab my favorite electronic reading device*...and attach myself to the Super Bowl every morning.
*I no longer subscribe to the local, left-leaning daily rag.
Sort of reminiscent of August Busch being told if he named the stadium in St Louis “BUDWIESER STADIUM” that MLB would not allow him to play in it- for their games.
Being a true entrepreneur, Augie said Ok, I will name it after myself - BUSCH Stadium.... FINE....
Then he went out and ‘invented’ a new beer, BUSCH.
Like he says, more than one way to ‘skin a cat’.
again they lie in wait to ambush our children with their deviant behaviors while we sit with our families safe in our homes watching ‘wholesome’ ‘American’ entertainment
i won’t be watching. the television will not be on.
but i will be taking note of ALL advertisers... and will let them know they are offending my religious principals and bordering on exposing children to deviant sexual behaviors. due to this, i will boycott their products for the upcoming year.
deviants. stand up to them ... or support them with you inaction. your choice.
what kind of country do you want your children to inherit?
I’ve only watched the Super Bowl once, for the commercials. Since the commercials will be available on youtube, I won’t have to do that.
I will, however, catch some of the Puppy Bowl.
One would think the NFL would want the term Superbowl used far and wide, to as many people as possible. These types of idiotic moves to “protect” the brand are ludicrous. Imagine Disneyland doing the same thing. I cannot.
Idiotic and only shows the controlling nature of the people running this org. Thankfully they will not get a penny from me.
I hear you.
Someone just said on that thread I linked, that it’s satire.
I’m not sure I believe that.
How to know for sure, in this deviant day and age?
Trademark, OTOH, is limited in scope to a range of products, in this case a sports/entertainment presentation. Trademark -requires- protection by its owner, or the right to exclude others from using the mark is lost. See "aspirin" for example.
Copyright also has a limited life. Trademark lasts as long as its owner protects it.
Attorneys harassing normal people again.
The NFL is working to protect its "sports/entertainment" turf.
They don’t do it against everyday people simply having a party or a charity fundraiser.
The NFL should be really proud of itself.
The “No Fun League” strikes again.
National Felon League
Well, being a nonprofit, the NFL has to protect its profits.
That should be looked into also. Forgot about that.
Radio ad from a few yrs ago that got away with it, for Dean’s Chip Dip:
“We can’t say the name of this event but it’s really Super...like a Bowl of Dean’s Dip.”
If Coca-Cola is the "official soft drink of the Super Bowl" and the NFL goes out and allows another commercial enterprise to sign a sponsorship deal with Pepsi for a "Super Bowl party" or a "Super Bowl edition of the Jay Leno Show" or something like that, then Coca-Cola isn't getting what they paid for.
Similar with trademark, NFL is attempting to retain exclusive control over use of the phrase. I'm not sure they'll succeed in the long run, see "aspirin."
I have heard of someone throwing a superb owl party. Celebrating the wise looking bird.
The only reason I’d watch that game (can’t say “Super Bowl” or I would get sued) is to see those drunken dumb asses who spend all that money for a ticket. Too bad the weather appears to be “balmy”. Who is playing in that game anyway?
Not copyright, but trademark. FWIW.
Trademark is for brands, which are usually, words, phrases, or logos. Trademark infringement is due to being confusingly similar, on related goods or services.
There’s a little overlap when an artistic work is also a logo.
This moronic article actually fails to give the answer to its own question.
The first answer is that the Super Bowl trademark covers broadcast and entertainment services, such as a little church gathering where admission is charged. The mark also covers all the different types of souvenir goods like shirts and hats.
But the NFL’s legal backfield has a few holes. Kraft owns Super Bowl for food, even though it started using its trademark about 10 years after the first super bowl.
The NFL would argue that its brand is a “famous” trademark (like Rolex, Coca-Cola, Cadillac, Smith & Wesson) and thus would be harmed by being used by others even on unrelated goods.
Even if so, that does not lawfully prevent the phrase “Super Bowl” from being used in a non-trademark sense. Yet the NFL still bullies others into fearing a baseless lawsuit for merely uttering the phrase.
can’t use Olympics either
You posted to the wrong thread. This is an emotion driven thread.
OK, everyone, hope you already bought all your snacks and drinks for the
Stupor Bowl, Stupid Bowl, Pimple on the Ass of Time Bowl. All this stupidity could lead to the Boycott Bowl.
Colbert’s joke writers: Superb Owl
Gotta admit, kinda funny...
Hopefully, as you continue down the road of life, you will have other things to be proud of and to announce to the world.
/snarky comments (of which I am NOT proud)
PS If your comment was, in fact, satire, then my comment never happened... The Vast Right(Left?) Wing Conspiracy is trying to impugn my reputation!
How about in Spanish...Bowl de Super!
I salute you. I haven’t watched a stupor bowl since the early 80s.
World champs is another weird pronouncement
= = = = = = = = = = = =
Like when the wag(s) say
“Americans won’t stand for another _______”
My question is “Who talked to the Panamanians and/or Peruvians?”
FUMBLE BALL is FUMBLEBALL.....
I understand the point, but that is the wrong example. Having worked for over a decade at the Anaheim Theme Park, I can assure you, any commercial use of their name, without a written agreement in place, WILL attract the attention of their fully staffed legal department. Thank you.
I’ll start worrying about it when they stop trying to strip the name of the team from the Washington Redskins.
Disney has successfully sued pre-schools and daycare centers to force them to remove images of Disney characters from walls and windows. They are quite famous for suing the carp out of anybody who would infringe their copyrights, and I don’t blame them.
Yes indeed. If you notice, I was particularly careful not to mention them, by name ;)
They really have no choice. Under copyright and trademark law, if you do not protect your 'property' it becomes public domain.
Yeah, that’s got to be satire. It’s about as believable as gay weddings at the Rose Parade or the Grammies. Oh, wait....
Yes, I assumed that’s because you still work for them. I never did, so I figured I was free to say it. I’m sure they wouldn’t mind my mentioning them, because it just spreads their reputation as badasses who will sue the carp out of anybody trying to use their cartoon characters.
I agree with this philosophy because a lot of investment went into the creation of the Intellectual Property (Yes, designing Timon and Pumbah was an intellectual effort. Stop laughing!). What bugs me a bit, though, is when they pull legal shenanigans to extend the natural deadline of the copyrights, as they did for Mickey Mouse. “Steamboat Willie” was a very long time ago, yet MM is still covered.
(My wife’s sister did work there, so Mrs. Liberty’s been at the park many dozens of times. We will *never* go there...)
I left there in 2001, but the plethora of legal paperwork I signed as a condition of employment keeps me cautious. Another trick they pull is to litigate, then delay, in court actions. They terminated a bunch of retiree benefits; the folks in question sued, and it was dragged out in court, for seven years. The day before trial, they settled, but by that time, a large portion of the affected retirees had passed away, and the original terms of retirement specifically stated that benefits terminated, upon death, so the heirs were S.O.L.
I’ve never been in the park, since I stopped working there, myself.
And if you don't believe it, just ask Bayer about its former U.S. intellectual property rights in the word 'aspirin'.
Jello and Band-Aid fight to make certain their competitors make 'gelatin desserts' and 'adhesive bandages'.
This just in, FIFA has just sued the NFL for using the term “Football.”
The heirs should have received the back payments, unless those were excluded from the settlement. If they were excluded, there are some attorneys that got away with malpractice.