By Chris McAndrew, a Junior Journalism/Pre-Law major at Temple University
Tim Tebow's jersey was one of the hottest selling items in Denver, but his trade to the New York Jets prompted a bitter battle between Nike and Reebok over rights to the coveted Tebow jersey.
The NFL has rules and regulations for on and off the field, and sometimes it seems as if the league is battling more than the players themselves. When it comes to the NFL’s merchandise agreements, companies put up enormous amounts of money to become the “Officially Licensed” retailer of NFL gear.
When Tim Tebow was traded to the New York Jets on March 21, Reebok began capitalizing on the renewed Tebow-Mania by producing Jets-Tebow shirts and other apparel as quick as possible. There was one problem — Reebok was no longer officially licensed to sell NFL gear or any apparel that was player-related. Nike had taken over that license in early March of 2012.
Nike filed a formal complaint against Reebok calling for permanent injunctive relief, compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorney’s fees arising from the suit. Nike also claims that Reebok violated the terms of the Lanham Act (unfair competition), misappropriation of rights of publicity, tortious interference with current and prospective business relationships, and unjust enrichment.
Nike and Reebok settled in April (Nike Inc et al v Reebok International Ltd, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-02275) with Reebok agreeing to halt the sale of Jets-related apparel bearing the Tebow name and buy apparel already shipped to retailers. In court papers, Reebok said it had made 6,000 jerseys and 25,000 T-shirts bearing Tebow’s name and number, as well as the Jets and NFL logos.
There have been multiple suits against trademark use and the unlawful selling of NFL merchandise, mostly directly from the NFL itself. Such suits can be seen in National Football League Properties, INC and New York Giants, INC vs. New Jersey Giants, INC. These suits against illegitimate merchandising companies are not uncommon, but a lawsuit against a nationally recognized retailer for the illegal use of NFL merchandise is surprising and could greatly impact this area of the law despite the settlement.
To discuss further legal complications within this case, The Legal Blitz spoke with Mary LaFrance, Professor of law at William S. Boyd School of Law at UNLV. She received her J.D. with High Honors from the Duke University School of Law in 1986, where she served as Executive Editor of the Duke Law Journal. Professor LaFrance has authored three books: Intellectual Property Cases and Materials (West 3d ed. 2007) (with David Lange and Gary Myers), Understanding Trademark Law (LexisNexis 2005), and Copyright in a Nutshell (West 2008), and her teaching and research interests include domestic and international intellectual property law, as well as the taxation of intellectual property.
No one can accuse NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell of leniency in his response to the New Orleans Saints bounty scandal. Four players were suspended a total of 31 regular-season games, including Jonathan Vilma (right) who will miss the entire 2012 season. All four players, with the support of the NFL Players Association have appealed their suspensions. Many analysts have predicted that the appeals process could eventually lead to a lawsuit in Federal Court. The Legal Blitz spoke with attorney Adam B. Marks about the NFL’s appeals process and the potential for ensuing federal lawsuits. Marks is a lawyer for Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. in Connecticut. He is also the author of Personnel Foul on the National Football League Players Association: How Union Executive Director Gene Upshaw Failed the Union’s Members by not Fighting the Enactment of the Personal Conduct Policy, 40 Conn. L. Rev. 1581 (2008). Marks discusses with the Legal Blitz the NFL’s appeals process, how the latest collective bargaining agreement does (or does not) govern the process, and what the players will need to prove to prevail in federal court. Continue reading →
Three-year-old filly Eight Belles was euthanized right on the track upon breaking both front ankles in a second-place finish at the 2008 Kentucky Derby (Courtesy: N.Y. Times)
This season marks the 138th running of the Kentucky Derby, which has come to be known by race fans as “The Most Exciting Two Minutes in Sports.” Between animal rights analysts, however, this most popular of horse racing events stands for little more than glorified animal abuse that should be punished with a hard horse kick in the groin rather than rewarded with a blanket of roses, a mint julep, and a large money purse. Steroid usage, inbreeding, and the undying desire for bragging rights among chic owners in this “sport of kings” has created many health issues for young horses each year. While the public is well-informed of the champions who have been euthanized and celebrated, no such media attention is given to the many more horses sent to slaughterhouses each year for underperformance.
To enlighten us on the many hot issues associated with horse racing, we sat down with Joyce Tischler, a California attorney who co-founded the Animal Legal Defense Fund over a quarter century ago and has helped shape the emerging field of animal law. In addition to handling some of the premier cases in the organization’s history, Joyce was ALDF’s executive director for 25 years and now serves as its general counsel, responsible for writing, lecturing on and promoting the field of animal law. In 2009, The American Bar Association Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section (TIPS) Animal Law Committee honored Joyce with the Excellence in the Advancement of Animal Law Award.
Athletes are occasionally liable for torts committed during sporting contests. This has occurred most notably when players step outside the lines and exceed what is appropriate for play. In obscene instances, criminal charges may also surface. In one of the most famous hockey cases, for example, NHL player Marty McSorley was convicted of assault after smashing his stick into the head of Donald Brashear with only seconds remaining in a game.
Last week, the issue of criminal charges amid ordinary sports conduct reached prominence in the aftermath of a Massachusetts high school hockey game. The parents of Duxbury (Mass.) High senior Tucker Hannon pursued a criminal assault and battery complaint against Scituate (Mass.) High hockey player Alex Way after Way delivered a tough hit on Hannon. Although the referees maintained it was a clean hit and did not assess a penalty, Hannon nevertheless suffered a concussion and missed the remainder of the season.
The matter was heard on Friday before a Plymouth District Court magistrate. Hannon’s attorney asserted that “if this [check] was off the rink, on a public way, that is gross, negligent assault and battery.” In the end, however, the magistrate was unconvinced by such an argument. Finding no probable cause for the complaint, Clerk Magistrate Philip McCue said “I’m not going to sit here as a hockey referee.” Way, an honor student and three-sport athlete committed to attending Williams College in the fall, was apologetic and Hannon admitted that it seemed very genuine.
Although dismissed, this case brings to light a valid question, which is whether conduct in a contact sport should be viewed under a substantially different lens than ordinary public conduct. Robert Harnais, Way’s attorney, said it was a “travesty” that Friday’s probable-cause hearing was held and that it was “shameful to sports as a whole” that a non-penalized play from a contact sport was scrutinized in a court of law. The magistrate’s ruling and statements indicate that he tends to agree, leaving such decisions (at least at the onset) to referees. Way delivered a clean hit to the body, not the head, on a player actively involved in the play.
Despite the media’s attention to the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association, which reviews plays that lead to concussions, it did not appear that a special standard was applied based on the fact that this was a high school game and not a professional contest. “With or without a penalty called during the game, a criminal complaint [stemming from a high school play] is really unheard of,” MIAA spokesman Paul Wetzel said. This could theoretically change, however, if Duxbury seeks some sort of revenge when they face Way and the rest of the Scituate lacrosse team next week.
Should criminal charges ever surface for conduct in the ordinary course of sport? What if the referees see the play and do not even call a penalty or foul? Should different standards apply to high school or other amateur contests?
Contribute your thoughts on this issue using our comment forum (below) or replying to @TheLegalBlitz on Twitter!
Each Friday, The Legal Blitz features an article from our good friends at Sport-In-Law in an effort to fulfill our promise of providing the best sports law content on the Web. This week’s feature details the lawsuit filed this week by the National Football League Players Association (“NFLPA”) against the NFL Coaches Association (“NFLCA”) in the District of Columbia.
The NFLCA was established in 2005 as a membership organization and District of Columbia Corporation representing coaches in the NFL. The NFLPA has multiple claims against the Coaches Association, the first of which is in its first decade, the NFLCA accrued $650,324.88 in debt to the NFLPA, who claims, the NFLCA failed to acknowledge the debt.
The plaintiff claims that the NFLCA has used office space, staff, administrative services and financial support that the NFLPA provided while being continually dependant on the NFLPA to pay for staff and licensing issues.
By Colin Tansits, a sophomore at Temple University’s School of Communications and Theater.
Brett Favre shed some tears during his first of eventually three retirement press conferences.
On March 4th, 2008, after an illustrious career with the Green Bay Packers, Brett Favre retired.
On February 11th, 2009, after an up and down season with the New York Jets, Favre retired, again.
On January 17th, 2011, after two years with the Minnesota Vikings, Favre hung up his cleats for the final time.
Today in professional sports it has become common for athletes to retire, and then come out of retirement. Whether this trend is due to a player’s sudden desire to play again or to gain financial assets, it has become somewhat normal.
But how can a player who is under contract with one team legally sign with another after coming out of retirement?
To find out we here at the Legal Blitz asked one of the must successful sports agents in the nation, JR Rickert. Rickert represents more than 100 professional athletes and entertainers, and has negotiated more than $250 million in professional sports contracts. His clients include New York Giants wide receiver Hakeem Nicks and Milwaukee Brewers outfielder Nyjer Morgan.
By Spencer Wingate, a legal assistant for Brock & Scott PLLC in Charlotte, NC and SportInLaw.com author.
Each Friday, The Legal Blitz features an article from our good friends at Sport-In-Law in an effort to fulfill our promise of providing the best sports law content on the Web. This week’s feature details the financial collapse of the United Football League (UFL) and the subsequent legal fallout from its inability to pay bills.
The United Football League is currently dealing with hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. The league has struggled with expansion, franchise shifts, and a variety of financial issues since its inception in 2009. They reportedly lost $225 million in their first three years of existence. The UFL is drowning in debt and they have already defaulted on loans. Reports of players, team personnel, a medical clinic, and a public relations firm not being paid have arisen. Now they face a lawsuit from an insurer for workers’ compensation premiums with the alleged damages exceeding $3 million.
Lions running back Mikel Leshoure has not played in a single NFL game yet, but he has been arrested twice for marijuana possession since Detroit drafted him in 2011.
Detroit Lions running back Mikel Leshoure has not played a single down in the NFL due to an ACL tear following his second round selection in the 2011 draft. Yet while he hasn’t spent much time running on grass, he has exhibited a propensity for smoking — and eating it. That’s right, Leshoure was recently cited for possession of marijuana in Baroda-Lake Township, Michigan after police saw him try to eat a bag of marijuana during a traffic stop. Despite his best efforts to claim he was chewing potpourri, the crumbs of marijuana on his shirt told a different story. Leshoure’s possession charge was his second in two months.
But was Leshoure really all that crazy to try to eat his weed during the traffic stop? What evidence do police need to search a vehicle for drugs? And is searching somebody’s mouth even constitutional? To answer these questions and more, we went straight to Detroit to pick the brain of criminal law expert and Wayne State University Law professor Anthony M. Dillof. Prof. Dillof teaches torts, criminal law, and criminal procedure. He has been published in the Michigan Law Review, Northwestern Law Review, Notre Dame Law Review, Buffalo Criminal Law Review, and the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology.
No one can accuse NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell of leniency in his response to the New 
Although dismissed, this case brings to light a valid question, which is whether conduct in a contact sport should be viewed under a substantially different lens than ordinary public conduct. Robert Harnais, Way’s attorney, said it was a “travesty” that Friday’s probable-cause hearing was held and that it was “shameful to sports as a whole” that a non-penalized play from a contact sport was scrutinized in a court of law. The magistrate’s ruling and statements indicate that he tends to agree, leaving such decisions (at least at the onset) to referees. Way delivered a clean hit to the body, not the head, on a player actively involved in the play.
