OT: UConn vs Morgan School (Husky Logo)

[coachcap]

Front page of N.H. Register: Large picture of the Husky log adorning the football field at Morgan School. It looks like a rough draft of the officially trademarked UConn Husky.
"To protect its interests, the university has asked town & school officials to remore Clinton's logo from wherever it might appear and to create a new one that is distinctly different from the university's husky.
'We're not looking for changes overnight, and there's going to be no legal proceedings', said UConn athletics spokesman Michael Enright."
"The Indian River logo is a different design from that used by UConn: It faces the opposite direction and does not have its tongue sticking out.
Enright said those changes are not sufficient to avoid trademark infringement."
"Clinton's concern is that it could cost about $ 20,000.00 to remove the logo from the town's new artificial turf field."

This is just what the University needs. Going after a small shoreline & alienating the local residents. I understand that the University is protecting its interests, but this is like squishing a worm with a sledgehammer.

 

[ZooCougar]

Imitation is the highest form of flattery. Why on earth would we seek to alienate a school like that?

 

[CL82]

Except they aren't. What UConn's position has been is that you need to stop using the logo but we will work with you as to timing. So when new uniforms are purchased, Clinton needs to buy them without the logo. As things wear out or are serviced, the logo will be removed. The floor in the gym can stay for the time being since a new building is being built. The turf field is an issue but the high school and the university are working together to resolve the issue. Students in the school are working on designing a new logo.

If UConn doesn't protect its intellectual property, they will lose it and it is a valuable asset. Everytime you see a cap or a piece of gear that means money to the university. They contacted the high school and the two of them are working to correct the copyright infringement in a manner that is reasonable. I am not sure that you can ask for more than that. I'd give them an A+ on this.

Link to the Courant article

 

[UConn9604]

Imitation is the highest form of flattery. Why on earth would we seek to alienate a school like that?

We're not seeking to alienate a school, we're protecting our trademark rights (the only valuable IP we have). If we don't do anything about this, we risk dilution of our trademarks.

It's the same reason Starbucks went after Sam Buck's and Starbarks; they had too much to lose by not going after Sam Buck's or Starbarks.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20121009/news/710099962/

http://www.minyanville.com/special-...arbuck-Sam-Buck-fair-trade/10/6/2010/id/30355

 

[ZooCougar]

I respectfully disagree. If the "Husky" Boot Company was copying us that would be one thing. But this is not the same thing.

 

[UConn9604]

I respectfully disagree. If the "Husky" Boot Company was copying us that would be one thing. But this is not the same thing.

Actually, you're right. That would increase our risk of trademark dilution (i.e., the use of the mark in a different class of goods, like Starbarks). Here, with Morgan, we're talking about express infringement (to the extent they use the logo on athletic apparel). Either way, if we don't enforce our marks, the marks can disappear on us.

We really don't have much of a choice.

If you want to read about an ugly sports trademark battle, check this out -- when is USC barred from calling itself USC? When Southern Cal claimed USC before South Carolina did (someone should warn Rutgers Al):

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/01/20/logo

 

[ZooCougar]

Actually, you're right. That would increase our risk of trademark dilution (i.e., the use of the mark in a different class of goods, like Starbarks). Here, with Morgan, we're talking about express infringement (to the extent they use the logo on athletic apparel). Either way, if we don't enforce our marks, the marks can disappear on us.

We really don't have much of a choice.

If you want to read about an ugly sports trademark battle, check this out -- when is USC barred from calling itself USC? When Southern Cal claimed USC before South Carolina did (someone should warn Rutgers Al):

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/01/20/logo

You definitely know more about this than I do. It still kind of seems like we are shutting a kids lemonade stand down though.

 

[ruskin]

I get the "intellectual property" stuff about this but these thugs from IMG need to pick their spots with a little more care. Heard they went to the state media with the same type of threat, telling them they had to seek permission whenever they wanted to use the UConn logo to go with a story (print, online TV). Believe most, if not all, told them to duck* off.

 

[junglehusky]

Part of this might be to set a precedent and discourage future infringement from other entities that would be larger than a local school, I bet. Other college teams and pro teams sometimes have similar cases with high schools, sometimes they look the other way, sometimes they want to protect their brand. In this case it sounds like they're trying to find a reasonable compromise.

 

[huskymedic]

I get the "intellectual property" stuff about this but these thugs from IMG need to pick their spots with a little more care. Heard they went to the state media with the same type of threat, telling them they had to seek permission whenever they wanted to use the UConn logo to go with a story (print, online TV). Believe most, if not all, told them to duck* off.

What does CLC (your link) have to do with IMG?

 

[huskypantz]

If you let one slide, others will follow. They're being very nice about it. Not sure what the big deal is.

 

[huskymedic]

If you let one slide, others will follow. They're being very nice about it. Not sure what the big deal is.

Give it a few threads - it'll be PP, GD and JH's fault by the time we're done and you'll find out Edsall blew the whistle.

 

[kingdobbs]

You definitely know more about this than I do. It still kind of seems like we are shutting a kids lemonade stand down though.

It seems like bullying, yes, because of the relative power disparities between the institutions, but all UConn really needed was evidence in the file to say "Yes, we have defended this trademark against infringement", should they pursue another entity for its trademark infringement. They're not out to screw Morgan School to the wall for it; the phrase 'can't get blood from a stone' would come to mind as to what UConn can really get out of a lawsuit anyway. And from what the article suggests, UConn isn't even particularly active in pursuing infringements (unlike some who can be *very* aggressive at seeking out potential infringements and send out C&Ds to everybody under the sun, for the same basic reason of "we need evidence that we've defended the mark for the future".).

Most trademark infringement allegations like this don't even go that far, because the two parties usually come to an agreement to stake out some space where the logo/mark can be used harmoniously. Like, hypothetically it could go: UConn sends the cease and desist, Morgan counter-offers "We will put the name 'Morgan School' clearly on our logo that we use for marketing and on all paraphernalia," and UConn says that's fine. There we go, mark defended. UConn can put it in a file for the next time around, which again is all they really needed.

I get the "intellectual property" stuff about this but these thugs from IMG need to pick their spots with a little more care. Heard they went to the state media with the same type of threat, telling them they had to seek permission whenever they wanted to use the UConn logo to go with a story (print, online TV). Believe most, if not all, told them to duck* off.

Most of them also know that their use of the logo would probably likely be upheld under fair use provisions, given the First Amendment freedom of the press.

 

[mattp]

I thought most high schools used college or professional logos and it was not big deal. I've seen several high schools with Eagles wings and Viking horns on their helmets, and I doubt they're paying royalties (although I have no idea really). Dover High School near me uses the Clemson paw print for their logo, and their main color is even orange. Mountain Lakes HS near me uses the Buffalo Bills logo with an orange background instead of red. I don't see the point in this.

 

[sportsart]

Don't expect to get any of their top talent anytime soon. Damn it, it just keeps getting worse.

 

[ruskin]

What does CLC (your link) have to do with IMG?

do a find for 'IMG' on the home page. at least 2 hits. CLC is an IMG entity

 

[huskymedic]

do a find for 'IMG' on the home page. at least 2 hits. CLC is an IMG entity

Got it.. thought IMG was media rights only didn't realize CLC was part of IMG Worldwide. Thx

 

[Srqhusky]

Thought it looked different enough. I mean they call themselves huskies too.
We had a similar incident down here with the Seminole logo on helmets of southeast high school. Those emblems matched much closer than the two dogs.
Fsu let them keep it

 

[Bootsthemonkey]

I'm a graduate of Morgan High School so my bias will be evident here. I've already been communicating via email with UConn on this for over a week now. Morgan has been using this Husky logo or ones similar to it for decades and it's my understanding that this is not the first time UConn has asked them to alter their logo (which I believe they've done in the past to appease UConn but cannot confirm). However as the recent story goes UConn recently "discovered" this infringement of their logo when someone from the university noticed the Husky logo on their soccer field (as the news has reported) or the logo on their basketball court (as other media sources are indicating).
The timing on this is curious as UConn is graciously allowing Morgan to "phase out" the logo. Morgan wouldn't need to tear up their basketball court because....a referendum has just passed to build a new school. What a coincidence!

I'm not an attorney or a trademark expert but after reading 15 USC § 1114 it appears to me that much of an infringement case relies on the concept of "likelihood of confusion." While the logos are similar, the logo is representative of the product. The product(s) are the athletic teams involved and I just find it at best an arguable point that anyone would confuse the athletic programs or facilities of UConn and Morgan high school. In the aforementioned Starbucks example that's a case where someone is obviously trying to deceive the customer and take advantage of a famous logo or design in order to make a profit selling a similar product. nobody is walking into the Peter's complex in Clinton and confusing it with Rentschler Field or the team that plays there. Nobody is walking into Morgan gym and confusing it with Gampel pavilion or a UConn hoops game.

As far as dilution of the product I think you have to consider the distribution. Morgan sells their product to basically the people in Clinton and for the most part just the families with kids enrolled buy the stuff. UConn is a national brand that even appeals to people overseas and has events televised nationally. The impact of any non-profit sales that take place in Clinton is so minimal I can't imagine that it has an impact that could be classified as "diluting" that of UConn's.

In the case that UConn is correct in their efforts to protect their trademark I believe having that trademark empowers them to grant usage rights as they see fit and they can dictate the terms of such an agreement. If that's the case I'm not sure why they don't just hammer out an agreement and out of goodwill forego any fees as the high school isn't turning any profit on it.

That's my opinion on the matter and I'm sure people will disagree. When I wrote to UConn last week I did mention that pursuing the matter might not be worth a bunch of bad publicity and it seems now that more and more news outlets are picking up the story. I know WFSB, NBC-30, New Haven Register and the Hartford Courant have all done pieces. Today the San Francisco Chronicle has published it and I understand ESPN (who I know you all love) is looking into doing a story on it.

 

[huskymedic]

People in general only want laws/regulations when then don't impact them, as soon as it impacts them - it's inconvenient or heavy-handed. It's like Planning and Zoning - plenty of complicated regulations but when someone gets called out for it, the media "woe is me" firestorm begins. (Pet bunny issue in North Haven). The media has nothing else to do but make issues bigger than they are. I think Kingdobbs explained it best.

 

[BlueDogs]

The fact of the matter is the Husky logo is hardly distinctive, and the figurative representation of a well known annimal, expecially the closer it comes to a real representation of the annimal, should not be protected. There is no confusion between the UConn Huskies and Morgan Huskies, nor is there a liklihood that Morgan's use would dilute their commercial rights. This is classic heavy handedness since Morgan could reasonably fight this but for the cost. At worst, all Morgan has to do it to restylize its design. If protecting their mark fis really at issue, the simple solution is UConn agrees to license the use of the mark to Morgan for its purposes provided it is displayed in connetion with name "Morgan".

This is a total load cr&p, and dont be fooled by the talking lawyer heads. Once again the University shoots itself in the head, and over what? A few teashirts sold at a local bakesale.

 

[ddminct]

I'm a graduate of Morgan High School so my bias will be evident here. I've already been communicating via email with UConn on this for over a week now.

You aren't a graduate of Morgan High School. You are a graduate of The Morgan School

 

[mattp]

Nobody is walking into Morgan gym and confusing it with Gampel pavilion or a UConn hoops game.

Nobody would confuse the gym, but they may confuse a shirt. I still don't see what the big deal is. I went to a Clemson game several years ago and bought an orange t shirt with their white paw print logo on it. It's a pretty ratty shirt that I wear all the time when I'm doing yard work and every time I go to Home Depot people ask me if I went to Dover High(also the Tigers). It's a nearby school that has the exact same logo, their primary color is also orange, and they do in fact sell an identical t-shirt. I doubt they ever paid anything to Clemson for its use, but I don't see what the big deal is. There probably 20,000 high schools in the country and hundreds if not thousands of colleges. Are they expected to each have a unique logo?

 

[uconNYC]

There probably 20,000 high schools in the country and hundreds if not thousands of colleges. Are they expected to each have a unique logo?

It's not difficult to find a talented graphic designer at any high school in America who could come-up with an original design. But then again that would require school officials to think outside the box.

I've had college kids come up with some amazing logos for projects I've been working on and all it cost me was some pizza and a reference letter.

 

[freescooter]

Actually I htought the Morgan Husky was really a copy of the UConn version. I doubt they independently dreamed it up. that particular husky is logo in fact is pretty distinctive with the long hair and all. I've seen various bulldog and other animal logos in the past but they have all been just enough different that while you can't identify the Yale Bulldog vs the Ferris State bulldog vs the Georgia bulldog, for instance, it is also very clear that they are not the same dog. Same with some high school bulldogs I've seen. I also think that the issue is bigger precisely because Morgan is in Connecticut. If some high school in South Dakota is using a copy of the UConn logo, nobody cares. if the guys down the street do it is a more sensitive issue.