- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NFL responds to Vitter
Posted on 1/30/10 at 9:28 am to GOP_Tiger
Posted on 1/30/10 at 9:28 am to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Yeah, that's what the NFL is saying now that the issue has blown up in its face, but that isn't what they were saying a week ago. They harassed a woman selling earrings when one earring said "Who" and the other "Dat", saying that they owned the phrase. No other Saints or NFL trademarks.
Not correct unless you provide full context.
2
Posted on 1/30/10 at 9:33 am to VOR
quote:
Yeah, that's what the NFL is saying now that the issue has blown up in its face, but that isn't what they were saying a week ago. They harassed a woman selling earrings when one earring said "Who" and the other "Dat", saying that they owned the phrase. No other Saints or NFL trademarks
Good God - Where do you people come up with this shite
Posted on 1/30/10 at 9:33 am to VOR
quote:
Not correct unless you provide full context.
Anyone wanna bet they were fleur de lis earrings with the words written on them?
Posted on 1/30/10 at 9:37 am to lapistola
quote:
Anyone wanna bet they were fleur de lis earrings with the words written on them?
Posted on 1/30/10 at 10:03 am to Fat Bastard
quote:
Who gives a frick about that???? That is the last thing i am worried about from a politician.
+freaking1
At least no one died in the backseat of his car. So Vitter is arrogant and the Puritans on here might disapprove of what they perceive of his personal life, but the dude really goes to bat for Louisiana. He has been surprisingly effective for a party that is in the minority. So, instead of supporting him for standing up to the NFL (which as Drew Brees pointed out, needs to be done occasionally), people want to bash him for dipping his wick somewhere he shouldn't have a couple of years ago.
Posted on 1/30/10 at 10:22 am to McLemore
Great Points! This is the NFL trying again for a power grab....
This probably never came up when the Saints made the playoffs for the first time back in the Jim Mora's days when Who Dat was the phrase all over La.
But now they (NFL) wants Who Dat....
Isn't it ironic.....
This probably never came up when the Saints made the playoffs for the first time back in the Jim Mora's days when Who Dat was the phrase all over La.
But now they (NFL) wants Who Dat....
Isn't it ironic.....
Posted on 1/30/10 at 10:23 am to LSUinHouston
quote:
But now they (NFL) wants Who Dat..
no they don't
Posted on 1/30/10 at 11:32 am to threeputt
How is this wrong?
Posted on 1/30/10 at 11:36 am to ajs008
quote:
These people are piggy backing the Saints success
And how are these people different from the toolbags on the Ticket Exchange scalping tickets?
Posted on 1/30/10 at 12:25 pm to macatak911
quote:
How is this wrong?
Because the store was advertising the shirts as a New Orleans Saints Shirt
Posted on 1/30/10 at 12:51 pm to threeputt
quote:
Because the store was advertising the shirts as a New Orleans Saints Shirt
Really? When did the NFL say THAT was the reason?
The NFL's letter specifically states that
quote:
"your unlicensed manufacture, distribution and sale of products bearing the NFL Trademarks, or any other confusingly similar logos that cause customers to believe that your products are licenses, authorized or affiliated with the NFL or its Member Clubs, constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition, and misappropriated the goodwill and reputation of the Saints Club and the NFL"
What trademarks or logos?
quote:
"The New Orleans Saints ("Saints Club") are the owners of several federal and state trademark registrations. Those registrations include, but are not limited to, the Saints Club's fleur-de-lis logo design and WHO DAT word marks"
After reading the NFL's letter to Fleurty Girl (the seller of #WhoDat shirt) the NFL makes no reference to how the shirt was advertised on the website or whatever. Only that using the term WHO DAT (supposedly an officially licensed NFL trademark) would confuse buyers to thinking the product was NFL approved.
LINK
LINK
This post was edited on 1/30/10 at 12:53 pm
Posted on 1/30/10 at 12:59 pm to medtiger
quote:
quote:
I wanted to print something like this and sell it on the street. There are no images of a fleur-de-lis, and no mention of the word "Saints." Could I do that legally?
Well if the NFL isn't after you, maybe NBC or whoever owns the Miami Vice logo will be
This post was edited on 1/30/10 at 1:00 pm
Posted on 1/30/10 at 1:12 pm to macatak911
I'm not agreeing with the NFL, but for the record the WHODAT logo on that Fleurty girl shirt is not the official logo that the Saints licensed years ago when it first started. If any of you go back and look and your Who Dat shirts, posters etc from the early '80's, the official logo is a Fleur de lis in the background and WHO DAT? (DAT is under WHO) over the fleur de lis at an angle.
Posted on 1/30/10 at 1:41 pm to macatak911
Did you read what you posted?
Posted on 1/30/10 at 1:45 pm to macatak911
" macatak911"
Right above the bold print - what do you think the words "distribution and sale of products" mean?
Right above the bold print - what do you think the words "distribution and sale of products" mean?
This post was edited on 1/30/10 at 1:50 pm
Posted on 1/30/10 at 1:54 pm to threeputt
quote:
Right above the bold print - what do you think the words "distribution and sale of products" mean?
It's easy to take things out of context like you are doing to help an argument. That's why I posted the entire sentence. The distribution and sale of products BEARING NFL PROTECTED LOGOS/TRADEMARKS.
These shirts have no NFL logos besides the disputed Who Dat words. shite, it's not even black and gold background on font.
This post was edited on 1/30/10 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 1/30/10 at 2:00 pm to macatak911
Then why did you leave out the other words in the sentence -" or other similar logos " 
Posted on 1/30/10 at 2:01 pm to macatak911
if the nfl wants to claim the fleur de lis and WHO DAT, why aren't they steaking their claim to the paper bags and the AINTS?
Posted on 1/30/10 at 2:05 pm to threeputt
quote:
Then why did you leave out the other words in the sentence -" or other similar logos "
When did I leave them out? Are you really complaining that i didn't bold the few words before that? Why don't I just type the whole letter and bold the entire thing?
Posted on 1/30/10 at 2:29 pm to macatak911
quote:
When did I leave them out?
When you posted:
quote:
That's why I posted the entire sentence. The distribution and sale of products BEARING NFL PROTECTED LOGOS/TRADEMARKS.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News