The NFL Pretending Trademark Law Says Something It Doesn't Leads To Hilariously Amateurish Ads For 'The Big Game'
from the the-game-that-shan't-be-named dept
Every year, right about this time, this site is forced to remind everyone that the NFL is completely full of crap when it comes to how it enforces its supposed trademark rights for the Super Bowl. While the NFL does indeed have some rights to the phrase and to controlling how it's used, those rights generally amount to prohibiting companies from falsely implying sponsorship of the game or a relationship with the NFL in commercial speech. What the NFL pretends is the case, on the other hand, is that it can somehow prohibit any company from even mentioning the Super Bowl in any context, up to and including simple factual statements.
All of this leads to the absurdity of every company that has chosen not to sponsor the NFL diving into the euphamism business, gleefully referring to the Super Bowl by any other name. "The Big Game" is the most popular of these, although the NFL has actually gone so far as to look into trademarking that phrase as well. The end result is the Picasso-ing of reality in which companies make references which every member of the public gets but that fall short of calling the NFL's biggest show by its proper name, something you would think the NFL would want everyone everywhere talking about.
With the Super Bowl a week away, we're already seeing this practice ramp back up. In Philadelphia, the home city of one of the competing teams, some small local businesses are getting into the act in hilarious ways.
Bethlehem’s SteelStacks campus announced Thursday it’s hosting a ‘watch party’ for the Big Game, and used clip art in place of NFL logos. One ArtsQuest staff member also tweeted a tongue-in-cheek ‘FLY [REDACTED] FLY!’ with a graphic advertising the event, which references Birds (but not Philadelphia Eagles) and includes a small gold cup instead of the Lombardi Trophy.
Here is the tweet and image in question.
The Birds are about to complete their trip on the road to victory and we’re showing the big game at @SteelStacks! Info: https://t.co/Va5HV8cEVy pic.twitter.com/YI440el1It
— ArtsQuest (@ArtsQuest) January 25, 2018
That is some glorious clip art right there. But just let it sink in how dumb this all is. Every viewer of that image is going to know that it's an advertisement for a watch party for the Super Bowl in which the Eagles are playing. Yet, because of the NFL's status as a fullblown bully-monster that's perfectly willing to throw gobs of expensive legal prowess over something as small as a watch party at a bar, out comes the clip art, the references to the "Big Game", and the Eagles suddenly become the "birds." And literally nothing is accomplished. The public will view this image with the exact same understanding as if it contained the phrase "Super Bowl", yet it somehow satisfies the NFL. That's just stupid.
The NFL gets a lot of value out of its corporate sponsorships, no doubt. There have been something like five billion dollars spent on ads throughout the history of the game. Why the league continues to pretend it has rights it doesn't have when companies accurately referring to the game's name are no threat at all is beyond me.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: football, nfl, super bowl, the big game, trademark, trademark stupidity
Companies: nfl
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"Why the league continues to pretend it has rights it doesn't have when companies accurately referring to the game's name are no threat at all is beyond me."
Ask the IOC. They've shown everyone worldwide how to abuse trademarks.
If someone does actually make the NFL back down, I don't think it would take long for Congress to pass a moronic law granting them IOC-style legal privileges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's different. They don't just abuse existing trademark law, they have countries write them new laws: "countries that host the games often create new, special laws to safeguard the Olympic properties above and beyond other existing law. These laws prohibit certain marketing tactics by companies that aren't official sponsors. Any new law typically provides much broader protection than basic trademark law and makes it easier to stop unauthorized activities. One day before Rio de Janeiro was chosen to host the 2016 Olympic Games, Brazil enacted the Olympic Act; it includes language that specifically protects the Olympic properties from unauthorized uses."
The NFL would love to get a law like that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course it's about the money
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Of course it's about the money
Let the NFL continue to prove themselves aspirants for the IoC-kie (annual IoC wannabe award - pronounced "yucky"). Crack a beer, have some nachos, and laugh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Universal tax on language
I think the only solution would be a universal tax on language. Say something, write something, and you must pay a fee to the NFL. Do you think they would be happy with that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Universal tax on language
Seriously though, I wonder how long it's going to take before someone like FIFA sues the NFL for claiming ownership over "football" for a game that is very obviously NOT football.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Universal tax on language
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Universal tax on language
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EDITOR! Spellcheck plz
c'Mooonnnnnn, Timothy!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: EDITOR! Spellcheck plz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: EDITOR! Spellcheck plz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Super Crock
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
just call it
or the "Duper Bowl"
-nailed it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: just call it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: just call it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Excited
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NFL is a deadman walking
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: NFL is a deadman walking
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: NFL is a deadman walking
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trademarks all the way down
Then they'll try to trademark "Sunday's Game".
Then they'll try to trademark "The Game this weekend".
Then they'll try to trademark "On Sunday".
Then they'll try to patent any activity that takes place on a Sunday, and take to court any advertisement that mentions any and all activities that take place on a Sunday.
Which will lead to this headline:
"NFL forces religious institutions across the nation to change all services to Tuesdays...At least until the NFL debuts their Tuesday Night Football schedule."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Trademarks all the way down
It somehow becomes the two sides competing for the right to use Sunday via a trial-by-combat.
The gladiatorial champions:
A team of linebackers vs one of the monster trucks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Trademarks all the way down
"That Thing with the Commercials"
"The Concert Bookended by Burly Men"
"Ballmaggedon"
"The Great Concussion-off"
"Synchronized Flushing"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Think of the C_Suite slobs for a change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think I'll be doing a little Netflix streaming that day.
I've never been a HUGE sports person, but I've just watched less and less every year, and now watch none of it. You want to take a knee, Move to North Korea!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: North Korea
So you think North Korea is the place to be to be safe from authoritarian abuse or to exercise 1st Amendment protected free expression? Okay then. . .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My Suggestion for a Stupid Hole ad
*Dogs, cats, orangutans, cell phones, cameras, food of any kind, drink of any kind are not permitted (You may check your clothing at the door, but management is not responsible for any lost or stolen articles). You may also not disparage the films shown, our rules, or our selection of the films shown in any way, in/on any media public or private, upon penalty of an IP Butt Hurt inquisition so fierce it would make Global Nuclear War look tame, directed at you, your family, friends, neighbors, and acquaintances, at least until you fold and turn over 137% of all your assets prior to your attorneys fees. And don't even think of remembering, with the express purpose of relishing, any part of any IP you might witness while approaching, entering, in, or exiting, or departing (until you are out of sight line) from our locations. Enjoy!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nothing is accomplished?
Why can't the NFL figure out that any mention of the Super Bowl or the teams or even the logos is more advertising? Yes, I know they have licenses to protect, but still.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nice bird picture, but...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Par for the course.
In this era the daily headlines are what horrible antisocial thing Trump did or said or Tweeted today, and global stereotypes of crude, impolite Americans are made manifest in our President, the United States is an embarrassment to the international community and other nations are looking to divest themselves with association with the states. America is all about the big foul aristocrats and their big foul corporations.
It seems entirely appropriate in this clime that advertisers of Superbowl® accessories (who also are implicitly advertising the Superbowl® itself) have to talk about the Superbowl® without actually saying Superbowl® or a number of locked-down synonyms. Soon they might even lose the big game because go NFL®!
Corporations and big institutions have a nasty habit of becoming antisocial and short-sighted in their huge size. Being more strict with IP may create a small increase in profits, but also deflates its cultural presence and creates a distates for the product by association with an unpleasant corporate entity.
The NFL® already has some disagreeable issues what with mixed responses to the National Anthem protest controversy, the political benching of Colin Kaepernick and for belittling players who want better protection from concussions now that concussion data from players is coming out.
Already I cannot enjoy the Olympics because of what a bag of jerks the Olympic committee is, and the economic ruin and desolation the Olympics leaves in its wake. Maybe it's time for Americans to discover association football. Or really, anything that isn't American Football. Maybe we need a better way to express our tribalism than mashing some corporate-sponsored champions together in a gladitorial arena.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Par for the course.
It's not that bad. We do understand that most of you didn't vote for him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We didn't vote for him.
Most of the US didn't vote for George W. Bush either, but he turned the US into a torture state who thought the Geneva Conventions were opt-in and obsolete.
So I think blaming us for allowing for unpopular jerks to get into power is valid. At this point it's a symptom of government failure.
Our representatives are forced to obey their corporate masters and not their own constituents. Maybe when we're scorned enough by the world, our representatives will actually allow for some reform so that we stop electing tyrants and start respecting human rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]