Trademarking the Twelfth Man

this is happening around here and a and m are mad about it and they will fit and win in court

I understand A&M has a claim, clem, but should their trademark have been granted in the first place for such a common and universal concept?

they are protecting their tradition i don't know if they should have the trademark or not but they have it so i guess thats that

I think it will be a hard mark to protect, clem. A&M can fight the big boys like the Bears and the Seahawks and the Bills but they can't go into every high school cove and neighborhood corner and wipe out "12th Man" from being used. The idea is too ingrained in the American football psyche to be exclusively held by A&M alone.

i think you are right and that could be the slow death of the trademark because it will become common use and it will be too expenseive for them to always fight in court

Now I think you're on to the core of it clem. A&M may own the mark, but it will become indefensible and not financially feasible to pursue.

Aren't you suggesting breaking the law? Isn't that what Seattle is doing?

Hi BobbyJohn --

It is nice to meet you and I welcome your first comment.

I'm not talking about legality. I'm talking about the morality of doing the right thing. Is it right that A&M owns such a commonplace phrase?

It may not be right but if they own it then going after other teams who use their property should be expected. Pat Riley has a trademark on "Three-Peat" doesn't he? No one can use that without his permission.

I understand your take, BobbyJohn.

There's the law and then there's common sense.

I don't blame A&M for going after the protection of their mark in court -- I just don't think they will be able to sustain a rash of violations and to prosecute each one in their interest.

The Pat Riley "Three-Peat" is an interesting example. Yes, he owns that mark but it is a made up mark that became part of the American vernacular so it, too, will be hard to defend in all instances of a violation.

Michael Buffer's "Let's Get Ready to Rumble" is also trademarked and I don't mind that so much because he invented it, it is a unique phrase, and it doesn't include a number!
:grin:

I know Buffer spends a lot of time and money protecting his mark. He makes a lot of money suing but hiring lawyers to do the hunting down is not cheap.

http://www.letsrumble.com/home.html

I see your point about it being hard to enforce but if you find out you can't use the phrase, don't use it. Don't be like Seattle and keep using it or say using "12" was inspired by the "twelfth win" of the season or something to try to cover illegal tracks.

I'm with you, BobbyJohn. I do think there are times, though, when the law encourages and then protects ridiculousness and there needs to be a common law consequence for resolution and restoring the sensible norm.

I take issue with the excessive legal protection afforded to branding of things and ideas that by all accounts should be public domain as they are simply composed of well-worn elements of language or culture. Unless a particular linguistic construct is a central component of the brand image of a given entity (e.g Just Do It for Nike) , I see no compelling reason why legal protection should be afforded. While the 12th man slogan will allow the production of bumper stickers, t-shirts and other convenient vehicles for the slogan, wont both the A&M team and the SeaHawks continue to be most identified with their team logo? How much will the 12th man concept augment their brand image? Furthermore, it is hardly a distinguished or unique slogan. Any brand association afforded by it will quickly be eroded by rapid adoption of the term into common vernacular (this may have already occured, in which case their legal claim seem rather moot).

I agree with you, Jonathan.

I don't think "12th Man" is specific enough in context or use to warrant a trademark. A&M, of course, disagrees with our position:

Michael Huddleston, director of the Texas A&M Collegiate Licensing Office, said that safeguarding a trademark keeps it from returning to public domain.... Huddleston said the items that infringed upon the Twelfth Man trademark were not the Seahawks' retired number 12 jersey or the Seahawks' flag that displays the number 12. "They actually named a magazine the 12th Man, and then this year they actually gave a game ball to a fan with the phrase '12th Man' emblazoned on the football," Huddleston said.

I find their argument against a magazine and a game ball ridiculous! Here’s the rest of A&M’s official fundraising side of the story.

When "Intel Inside" was popular years ago as an advertising slogan, a San Diego office building was sent a letter from Intel demanding the building stop using the phrase "Internet Inside" as a marketing tool because, Intel claimed, the idea of the building was infringing on its mark.

A friend of mine who worked in the "Internet Inside" building said Intel would be going after me next for my "Go Inside" magazine as a mark infringement! I told him the difference is different because "Intel Inside" suggests something technically inside something else while "Go Inside" is a verb commanding action from the reader without any technological bent whatsoever!

My friend didn't find my argument funny and I told him they should fight Intel because Intel's claim was over-reaching but, of course, my friend's company dropped "Internet Inside" because that was easier to do than fight it out in court and risk losing and paying attorneys' fees for both sides.

A lot of trademark disputes get resolved when one side is cowed by the other and not because of being right on a point of law and that is precisely what A&M hopes will happen as you can read at the end of the story in the hotlink I provide above.

The same thing was in effect when the "Big Game" was played in Detroit. A lot of advertisements referred to a specific event by the term "Big Game" instead of using the trademarked term because they didn't want to pay or couldn't get permission to use it.

Maybe another term to signify the fans will be developed and put into the common vernacular. It might be fun to think of some term to refer to fan support.

I understand the need to protect trademarks. If entities didn't, there would be all sorts of infringements.

I also like it when people come up with alternatives to trademarked terms, i.e. "Big Game." It adds to our language and is in the spirit of our American competitive spirit.

I took a look at the U.S. Trademark database and saw that there is also a live trademark for 12th Man referring to beer and non-alcoholic beverages.

I wonder if this causes A&M any problems as schools are always struggling to keep their students from consuming such products?

So Chris, are you saying "Big Game" was substituted for "Super Bowl" in Detroit area advertisements?

Your search URL didn't work for me but I'm thrilled you were able to look it up for us! What a fun find! I certainly wonder what, if anything, A&M might do about that one!
:grin:

All over Chicago, car dealers, radio stations, and restaurants were advertising specials for the "Big Game." Everyone knew it referred to the "Super Bowl."

Here's a Washington Post article about the "poor man's" or "wise man's" way to advertise without spending millions for a license to use "Super Bowl."

I like it that creative people figure out ways to spark people's minds to think certain ways without specifically using specific words.

Outstanding link, Chris, thanks! I'm printing it out now. I had no idea this "Big Game" thing was going on and I thank you for brining it to my attention.

I, too, love the creative workaround for a sticky legal wicket!
:mrgreen: