rss rss rss
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Submission Policy
  • Back Issue Archives
  • Editors and Staff
  • Alumni
pg2_g_ttebow1_576
New York, Sports // May. 06, 2012 // by Brian Roe // 0 Comments

“Tebow-Mania” Already Rocking New York’s IP Scene

Critics, linebackers, and Mark Sanchez are not Tim Tebow’s only competition.

Tim Tebow has already found his name at the center of several hotly contested intellectual property disputes.  Before Tebow even received his new playbook from the New York Jets, a controversy erupted in federal court in Lower Manhattan between sports merchandise moguls Nike and Reebok over the right to sell Tebow Jets jerseys.  Not long after, three New Yorkers battled over the trademark rights to the phrase “Timsanity,” a play on the viral phrase “Linsanity” inspired by Knicks sensation Jeremy Lin.  Most recently, Tebow has sent his own lawyer into the fray to challenge two of his fans for trademark rights to the term “Tebowing,” a pop-culture craze named after Tebow’s on-field, one-knee prayer stance.

Deserved or not, the Jets’ newly acquired backup quarterback is a media darling, an international sensation, and one of the biggest names in professional sports.  During the 2012 season, the only jersey that sold more than Tebow’s Denver Broncos shirt was that of league MVP Aaron Rodgers, marking the second straight season that sales of Tebow jerseys ranked in the top three.  Reebok International Ltd., who has been the exclusive licensor of NFL merchandise for the past ten seasons, was a big beneficiary of Tebow’s popularity.

Reebok’s deal, a 10-year, $300 million contract signed back in 2000, expired on March 31, 2012.  Nike immediately succeeded with a five-year contract, figured to be worth upwards of $150 million, for the exclusive supplying rights to uniforms, base layers, sideline gear, and fan apparel.  But when Tebow was traded to the Jets on March 21, Reebok attempted to swoop in for one last push by selling 6,000 Tebow-Jets jerseys and 25,000 T-shirts.

Nike immediately sued to enjoin Reebok from selling the merchandise, alleging that Reebok “misappropriated publicity rights, interfered with business relationships and unjustly enriched itself” by failing to get the quarterback’s permission for the product launch.  Further, Nike claimed that Reebok’s tactics were an impermissible attempt to capitalize on a “”unique and short-lived opportunity” that should belong to Nike.  Judge Kevin Castel of the S.D.N.Y. granted the injunction, criticizing Reebok’s midnight effort to sell apparel for players changing teams (he also cited the sale of jerseys of Tebow’s Denver replacement, Peyton Manning), and finding that Nike had shown a “probability of success” in its pursuit to permanently stop Reebok from selling Tebow-Jets jerseys.  The two sides eventually reached a “mutually agreeable resolution”, as Reebok removed all of its Tebow-Jets merchandise from stores.

The battle for Tebow is not confined to the corporate arena.  Three New Yorkers (all of whom, incidentally, are Giants fans) are vying for the trademark rights to the phrase “Timsanity.”  Daniel and Christian Perez, a pair of brothers from Brooklyn, filed their applications with the US Patent and Trademark Office one day after Frank DeGrim, a hedge fund manager from Manhattan.  The men all see an opportunity to make and sell Tebow merchandise in a very lucrative New York sports market.  Noting that the “typical test is sight, sound, and meaning,” trademark lawyer Kurt Anderson says that neither application may stand a chance due to the phrase’s obvious similarity to “Linsanity.”  Anderson notes that should Tebow challenge the trademarks, the one saving grace for the opportunistic New Yorkers may be the generic nature of the name “Tim.”

Earlier this month, Tebow finally sent his lawyer into the fray in an effort to preserve his own brand.  Jared Kleinstein, a 24-year-old Broncos fan from Manhattan and creator of “tebowing.com,” claims that he came up with the phrase. (Yeah,okay.)  Kleinman’s application to the US Patent and Trademark Office has been met by a letter of protest from Tebow’s attorney, Anthony Keats, who claims that the trademark should be awarded to nobody other than Tebow because of the confusion that would be created concerning Tebow’s connection to the products sold.  Another application, submitted to the USPTO by Jason Vollmer of Jacksonville Beach, Florida, has been denied due to a “false connection to a living individual.”

Even though Kleinstein filed his application on October 27, 2012, nearly two months before Tebow’s attorney submitted his application, intellectual property experts feel this fact is of little significance to the USPTO.  Even if his dubious claim that he came up with the expression is true, trademark attorney Keith Weltsch explains, “he’s still playing off the name and fame of Tim Tebow…he’s going to have a difficult time trying to establish there is not a false association.”

All of this for a backup quarterback.

Written by: Brian Roe

 

Brian Roe is a second-year law student, admitted Tebow critic, and life-long, suffering Jets fan. He is interested in the way that the law interacts with all facets of sports, and longingly awaits a Jet Super Bowl run.

Leave Your Response

The IPLJ Blog. Brought to you by:

Fordham University School of Law's Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal

Search by Tag

Archives

  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • August 2007
  • April 2007

Fordham University Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal BLOG

IPLJ Editor-In-Chief:
Ryan Fox

IPLJ Managing Editor:
Tiffany Miao

IPLJ Technology & Blog Editor:
Patricia Chang

Blogroll

man-question-mark-238x300

Federal Circuit Still Confused Over Software Patents

Jun. 05, 2013 // 0 Comments

In an en banc decision, the Federal...

Apple Samsung

ITC Bans Sales of Older Apple Products

Jun. 05, 2013 // 0 Comments

The International Trade Commission has banned the...

SDNY Rules Digital Music NOT Subject to First Sale Doctrine

Apr. 25, 2013 // 0 Comments

Judge Richard J. Sullivan granted plaintiff Capitol...

shakiradelarua

Legal Woes for Colombian Popstar Shakira Ignite

Apr. 24, 2013 // 0 Comments

Internationally known singer Shakira is facing a...

twitterbird

Hashtag Tweet About It: Twitter Finally Gets a #Patent

Apr. 20, 2013 // 0 Comments

After years of patent pending actions for...

com

The Future of “.com”

Apr. 17, 2013 // 0 Comments

Following ICANN’s 46th meeting in Beijing, the President...

EuroPatent

The European Court of Justice Dismisses Actions Against the Single European Patent

Apr. 16, 2013 // 0 Comments

In 2011, the European Council authorized enhanced...

twitter2

Hiding Behind a Hashtag: #hatespeech or #freespeech

Apr. 13, 2013 // 0 Comments

Twitter is being sued in a French...

SME_innovation

Innovation in China

Apr. 12, 2013 // 0 Comments

In this South China Morning Post article, Benjamin...

Facebook-Lawsuit

Timeline Trademark Tiff

Apr. 10, 2013 // 0 Comments

Facebook Inc. is embroiled in a legal...

Journal Updates

yoga

Article by IPLJ’s Senior Articles Editor Published!

Apr. 23, 2013 // 0 Comments

“Stretching Copyright to its Limit,” an article...

2013-Cultural-Heritage-Law-Panel-email

Art Law Panel Discussion: April 10, 2013, 7:30PM

Apr. 04, 2013 // 0 Comments

Please join us on April 10, 2013...

jackford

“Trials of The Century: Media and the Law” with Jack Ford: March 18, 2013, 4PM

Mar. 05, 2013 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ invite you to...

volume

Go, Little Book!

Jan. 10, 2013 // 0 Comments

Well, maybe not so little.  We’re thrilled...

law360

IPLJ Symposium Mentioned on Law360.com!

Nov. 15, 2012 // 0 Comments

Our sincere thanks to all of those...

cite

Big week for IPLJ’s Symposium Editor!

Nov. 08, 2012 // 0 Comments

A Volume XXII note written by IPLJ’s...

IP

November 9, 2012: IPLJ Symposium

Oct. 10, 2012 // 1 Comments

Please join us on Friday, November 9,...

hollywood

Fordham Law Named One of America’s Top 10 Entertainment Law Schools!

Jul. 20, 2012 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ are so proud...

4

Hello, Book 4!

Jul. 02, 2012 // 0 Comments

We are so pleased to share Book...

3

Book 3 Is Complete!

Apr. 27, 2012 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ are so happy...

Categories

  • Apple
  • Art
  • Biotech
  • Blogroll
  • Books
  • Broadway
  • Celebrity
  • Cell Phones
  • Censorship
  • Communications Law
  • Computers
  • Congress
  • Copyright
  • Counterfeit
  • Design
  • DMCA
  • Doh!
  • Entertainment
  • Facebook
  • Fashion
  • First Amendment
  • Fourth Amendment
  • FSLF
  • General
  • Google
  • International IP Law
  • Internet
  • Journal Updates
  • Major League Baseball
  • Microsoft
  • Movies
  • Music
  • National Football League
  • NBA
  • NCAA
  • New York
  • News
  • Patents
  • Piracy
  • Plagiarism
  • Privacy
  • Royalties
  • Social Media
  • Sports
  • Startup
  • Surveillance
  • Technology
  • Television
  • Trade Secret
  • Trademark
  • Trolls
  • Twitter
  • United States Supreme Court
  • Video Games

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court Rules on Reverse Payment Settlements
  • Isolated Genes are Patent-Ineligible, Apparently
  • The Trouble with Seeds
  • Federal Circuit Still Confused Over Software Patents
  • ITC Bans Sales of Older Apple Products

Admin

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

The IPLJ

The Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal is one of the leading scholarly law journals dedicated to the publication of Articles, Essays, Comments, Addresses, and Notes on intellectual property, media, and entertainment law.

The Blog is the Journal's online counterpart. This Blog strives to present the most up-to-date intellectual property, media, sports, art, and entertainment law news and issues... and then some. We at the IPLJ find this ever-changing field fascinating and relevant. We hope you find this Blog to be the same.

  • © Copyright IPLJ / All Rights Reserved.
  • Premium WordPress Themes / Theme by wpStyles.org