Now that the Detroit Tigers are good again, a lot of their merchandise is flying off the shelves back where I'm from in metro Detroit. However, this new success has also brought with it many instances of what I believe to be copyright infringement of the Tigers logo. Here is the actual, classic Tigers logo featuring what is known as the "olde English D". Now, small clothing companies who are separate from Major League Baseball have used a slightly altered "D" to cash in on the thriving market while avoiding hefty licensing fees for the authorized use of the logo. The "D" that they use is definitely modified but still has the purpose of reminding people of the actual Tigers logo. Here's one example of the altered "D" on a shirt that was extremely popular during the Tigers' playoff run last year. The sharp edges of the actual "D" logo are gone while the "olde English" style remains. The creator of the shirt doesn't even hide his/her intentions as the description of the shirt says that it's an actual Detroit Tigers shirt. I feel like using this altered "D" is a clear cut case of copyright infringement because the creators try to pass it off as the real logo and it definitely has a negative effect on the market for authorized Tigers merchandise.
However, in light of the creative commons articles we have read, this might have a positive effect on the overall popularity of the Tigers. These unauthorized, clever shirts are probably more popular than the actual authorized shirts that tend to be pretty lame. The more people who buy any Tigers merchandise, be it authorized or unauthorized, the more the word about the Tigers will spread and possibly more tickets to their games will be sold. So, in the long run, it might have a positive overall effect on money made by the Tigers, but it still seems to me to be a pretty damaging copyright issue that I'm surprised hasn't been addressed yet by Major League Baseball.
Lastly, while I was looking for some good altered logos, I came across a modified version of a throwback Chicago White Sox logo. Here's the original throwback logo, and here's the modified one. Can you tell the difference? Maybe the Tigers should just be happy that their modified logo is more flattering than the White Sox one and leave the issue alone haha
However, in light of the creative commons articles we have read, this might have a positive effect on the overall popularity of the Tigers. These unauthorized, clever shirts are probably more popular than the actual authorized shirts that tend to be pretty lame. The more people who buy any Tigers merchandise, be it authorized or unauthorized, the more the word about the Tigers will spread and possibly more tickets to their games will be sold. So, in the long run, it might have a positive overall effect on money made by the Tigers, but it still seems to me to be a pretty damaging copyright issue that I'm surprised hasn't been addressed yet by Major League Baseball.
Lastly, while I was looking for some good altered logos, I came across a modified version of a throwback Chicago White Sox logo. Here's the original throwback logo, and here's the modified one. Can you tell the difference? Maybe the Tigers should just be happy that their modified logo is more flattering than the White Sox one and leave the issue alone haha
posted by Chip Stevenson at
3:16 PM
1 Comments:
Well, I think the "SUX" shirts are probably parodies...although I've been to a White Sox game, so...maybe not. :)
Good pickup of a potential copyright issue here, Jared. As you point out, it seems odd that MLB, which is generally very protective of their IP, hasn't squashed these knockoff designs. Although, certainly a case can be made that it would do more harm than good (in PR if not legal terms, anyway) to make a big stink about it just when the team is gaining popularity (and selling tickets). I would also argue that the original "D" is not particularly distinctive -- I doubt that someone specifically designed that font for the Tigers, and if they wanted a more unusual logo they could easily design one. That doesn't mean it doesn't have a copyright attached, but it does make it harder to stop people from selling very similar shirts -- after all, there are plenty of very similar, uncopyrighted fonts out there for them to choose from.
This, however, is where they may run into a trademark problem -- a brand logo like this would have a much better chance of winning an injunction on that basis, as we will see.
By
emily, at 5:46 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home