Nike, Great Protectors Of IP, Found To Be Infringing On Copyright And Refusing To Pay After Software Audit
from the live-by-the-ip-die-by-the-ip dept
A brief review of Nike's history on matters of intellectual property will result in the impression that the company is a stalwart of IP protection. The company has been fond in the past of relying on intellectual property laws to take strong enforcement actions, even when the targets of those actions are laughably dwarfed by the company's sheer size. Like many massive athletic apparel companies, it jealously protects its trademarks and patents. And, yet, it has been found in the past to be perfectly willing to infringe on the trademark rights of others.
But those past instances are nothing compared to the full brazen display alleged by Quest in its copyright lawsuit against Nike.
The company, known for developing a variety of database software, filed a lawsuit in an Oregon federal court this week, accusing Nike of copyright infringement. Both parties have had a software license agreement in place since 2001, but during an audit last year, Qwest noticed that not all products were properly licensed.
“That audit revealed that Nike had deployed Quest Software Products far in excess of the scope allowed by the parties’ SLA,” Quest writes in their complaint, filed at a federal court in Oregon.
In addition, Quest says the audit revealed that Nike was using pirated keys and cracked versions of Quest software to route around paying for the full licensing costs it would otherwise be obligated to pay. Those types of actions aren't the sort of accidental infringement we've come to expect at large companies like Nike. Instead, they constitute a willful attempt to not pay for the software in use.
Now, should your mind already be conjuring the vision of a few employees going rogue, with upper Nike management having no idea this was going on and being perfectly willing to make all of this right... naaaaaaah.
When the software company found out, it confronted Nike with the findings. However, according to the complaint, Nike refused to purchase the additional licenses that were required for its setup. This prompted Quest to go to court instead...The company requests an injunction restraining Nike from any infringing activity and demands compensation for the damages it suffered as a result. The exact height of these damages will have to be determined at trial.
Honestly, it's hard to imagine what the executives and legal team for Nike have planned for this trial. Unless Quest's audit is simply wrong -- a possibility, but not likely -- then I'm not sure what the defense of any of this would be. Given that Quest rather kindly tried to get Nike to do right by it outside of court before filing suit, any jury sitting for this trial is likely going to notice what a bad look this is for Nike. Again, that all assumes there isn't some other explanation for all of this, but one would have expected such an explanation to be presented to Quest upon contact, and yet the lawsuit was still filed.
Regardless, this is yet another instance of a company happy to wield intellectual property upon others only to be found to be violating those rights itself. You can almost set your watch to it.
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: audit, copyright, software, trademark
Companies: nike
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Just do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simple reason
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
C'mon, people. There's an entire world and all you do is re-write what everyone has already seen? -- And do you wonder why ad revenue has plunged?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
The TechDirt article includes a link to, and quotes, the Torrent Freak article, while adding a good deal of the author's opinion of the case, and of Nike, before, between, and after the quoted facts.
If that gets labeled a rewrite, I think that both Fox News and CNN consist solely of plagiarists.
(Besides, I hadn't seen any news of the case until this post. Last I checked, I'm part of everyone. I suggest you dismount your steed, for it appears to be under the influence of marijuana.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
And speaking of writing "yesterday's news", I'm still waiting for Masnick's thoughts about last month's "Wolfgang's Vault" court ruling, of San Francisco concert promoter Bill Graham's lifetime collection of concert "bootlegs" that he had secretly stockpiled and are now public -- a court judgement which was such big news I didn't even bother submitting any links, assuming that Techdirt was probably being flooded with them. It's been a court case that Mike has reported on over the years, and now that it's come to a (bad news) finale .... it's somewhat shocking that nothing more has been said here. Or maybe I've just missed it, and if so I apologise.
Here's one of many links to that story :
https://www.courthousenews.com/music-publishers-win-suit-over-concert-recordings/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
Every time I comment here, I DOUBLE the number of comments because the fanboys are compelled to ad hom. -- Oh, and a screen name not used in four years is STILL the target of random idiocy! THREE or four times just yesterday!
This re-write is not attracting readers. -- Guess except for the one AC who either can't access Torrent Freak, or is too busy to glance over every couple weeks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
- Capt. Jack Sparrow
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Hey, I have a question: What comments, if any, can you offer in regards to the subject of the actual column?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They kick you off their forums for spamming sovcit lit again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you think you can do better than Techdirt, do better or die mad about Techdirt writers being better than you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
Also for someone who constantly, falsely, accuses others of being "pirates", you do seem to be far more knowledgeable about the subjects sources that everyone else around you. Almost as if you're overcompensating for something...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You are so two weeks ago. Another re-write from Torrent Freak.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
At least they play fair on the tr...
..ack!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's always been standard journalism practice to use a person's last name rather than first name in subsequent repetions throughout the body of the article. I've always felt that the rule should be broken when reporting a story about family members who all share the same last name, as it can make for some very confusing reading. However, rules are rules. Even Wikipedia follows this standard of formal writing rather than informal speech.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And you would be wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Or, better yet, Major.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think IP rights are much like morality restrictions.
Everyone is okay with pirating and their friends doing it, but not strangers, and definitely not with IPs they own.
Everyone is okay with having illicit affairs or their friends doing it but not strangers and definitely not with their own spouses.
I may have Poe'd myself. I'm not sure that's a joke.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I think IP rights are much like morality restrictions.
IP law is for you, but not for me!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I think IP rights are much like morality restrictions.
Ah, but the thing you want to avoid with copyright et al is germinating others, not yourself.
I mean, have you ever seen a popstar suing a groupie who maliciously let herself get pregnant and raised offspring so successful that it cannibalized his market, utilizing his genetic property?
I mean, we actually have seen court cases like that with genetic engineering, but I don't think they have been brought up in consequence of straightforward fornication. They are usually the other way round.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's conflate trademarks and copyrights as IP
because it makes for a great headline and diatribe.
Too bad that we usually try to point out that this does not make sense at all exactly because painting all of this with an overarching coarse brush does not leave room for intentionally free areas of taking up others' ideas.
I don't think that the payoff for this kind of hypocrisy is worth the occasional sensational article that can be wrung from it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Quest is there.....Just do it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Been there
Anyway, M$ found out, audited, wanted money, PCs were cleaned, and we were all given WordStar, a shareware(?) word processing program.
Amazing how the world looks different from the other side of the fence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]