In this episode of The Briefing by the IP Law Blog, Scott Hervey and Josh Escovedo discuss developments in the trademark dispute between NBA star Luka Doncic and his mother.
Continue Reading The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: NBA Star Luka Doncic Goes Hard in the Paint and Seeks to Cancel Mom’s Trademark(Part 2)
A jury in the District Court for the Southern District of Illinois in the case of Alexander v. Take-Two Interactive Software found that the depiction of tattoos on wrestler Randy Orton in a video game published by Take Two Interactive infringed the tattoo artist’s copyright in the tattoos. In this author’s personal opinion, the District Court got it all wrong.
Continue Reading Tattoo Artist Copyright Win Will Create Uncertainty Over Celebrities with Tattoos
©2022. Published in Landslide, Vol. 14, No. 4, June/July 2022, by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association or the copyright holder.
This article was written by Josh Escovedo and Michelle Yegiyants.
The landscape has changed. After decades of the NCAA reaping the benefit of college players, their labor, and their name, image, and likeness (collectively, NIL), the NCAA has changed its policy and allowed players to market their NIL without sacrificing their amateur status. However, the NCAA only made this change after a scathing U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a related matter, where the Court affirmed a decision from a U.S. district court enjoining the NCAA from limiting universities from providing student-athletes with certain education-related benefits.[1] In Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion, he warned the NCAA that it should strongly reconsider its NIL-related policies before such matters are taken before the Court.[2] The Court issued its decision on June 21, 2021. The NCAA responded by changing its policy effective July 1, 2021.[3]
Continue Reading A Brave New World: The NCAA’s New NIL Policy and the Need for Federal Legislation
In this episode of The Briefing by the IP Law Blog, Scott Hervey and Josh Escovedo discuss how marketing practices changed for the March Madness tournament this year, and what that meant for athletes.
Continue Reading March Madness Marketing Rebounds With a New Twist
On Tuesday, October 26, 2021, Cleveland Roller Derby filed suit against the Cleveland Guardians Baseball Company, LLC, which is the entity formerly known as the Cleveland Indians Baseball Company, over its intent to rebrand the baseball team as the Cleveland Guardians. According to Cleveland Roller Derby’s complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, there cannot be two Cleveland Guardian teams in Cleveland, and it was the first. As a result, it is seeking an injunction precluding the baseball team from using the trademark. According to Cleveland Roller Derby, a non-profit entity, despite being valued at over $1 billion, the baseball team is trying to bulldoze the roller derby team’s superior trademark rights to the Guardians name.
Continue Reading Baseball Versus Roller Derby – Cleveland’s Battle for the Guardians Trademark
