I agree with your sentiment. Quite frankly, I'd be shocked if the NHL follows through on proceeding to court. I think the worst case scenario for the business owner will be a nominal out of court settlement as an acknowledgement of his wrongdoing.
I can't see the NHL taking it that far either. Though it wouldn't surprise me, as Bettman is an aggressive little fellow. This is just a scare tactic by the NHL as far as I'm concerned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLoblaw
Excellent law blog, by Eric Macramalla, concerning the issue!
I guess Annakin Slayd better stop making those songs that say Go Habs Go every year and team990 better stop playing them. Wouldn't want to infringe on the precious copyrights of the almighty NHL.
Good way to "relate" to your fans and monsieur et madame tout le monde NHL. Bravo!
I guess Annakin Slayd better stop making those songs that say Go Habs Go every year and team990 better stop playing them. Wouldn't want to infringe on the precious copyrights of the almighty NHL.
Good way to "relate" to your fans and monsieur et madame tout le monde NHL. Bravo!
That's a little different, Annakin Slayd isn't trying to advertise anything.
Also it's not about "relating to your fans", it's about protecting a registered name (logo). You allow this restaurant owner to do this, where does it stop?
That's a little different, Annakin Slayd isn't trying to advertise anything.
Also it's not about "relating to your fans", it's about protecting a registered name (logo). You allow this restaurant owner to do this, where does it stop?
But the radio station playing his song does though.
That's a little different, Annakin Slayd isn't trying to advertise anything.
But isn't he advertising himself? He's a musician by trade.. can you name one song of his that isn't Habs-related? He's getting tons of publicity through his affiliation with the Habs.
(not trying to knock him at all- but don't think the line can be so easily drawn)
But isn't he advertising himself? He's a musician by trade.. can you name one song of his that isn't Habs-related? He's getting tons of publicity through his affiliation with the Habs.
(not trying to knock him at all- but don't think the line can be so easily drawn)
Yes he is advertising himself, as all singers do. In this case though, he's not claiming to be associated with the Habs. He could get in trouble for the video he made, as he used CBC footage that I'm sure he didn't get permission to use. That would be with CBC though, not the NHL or the Habs.
Actually I know he has a few other non-hockey related songs. I just don't know the names off hand.
Edit: Also since the Habs play his song at the games, I'm guessing they are okay with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI
everything, his song is played on the radio (commercial use).
Oh I see what you're saying. It's a song though, if the announcers were to claim on the air that the song was associated with the Habs. That would be a different story. No copyright law is being broken by the radio station in this case.
Yes he is advertising himself, as all singers do. In this case though, he's not claiming to be associated with the Habs. He could get in trouble for the video he made, as he used CBC footage that I'm sure he didn't get permission to use.
Actually I know he has a few other non-hockey related songs. I just don't know the names off hand.
Oh I see what you're saying. It's a song though, if the announcers were to claim on the air that the song was associated with the Habs. That would be a different story. No copyright law is being broken by the radio station.
That's where you're wrong IMO (I'm no lawyer), the radio station doesnt claim to be associated with... but Basha didnt claim to be either... and yet, basha is fined...
I think cases like this would be treated differently if it were to go to court... you could always pretend to just be a fan as what you're "sponsoring" is a sports franchise, not looking to make money... contrary to Cage aux Sports for example who is obviously making $ off sporting events shown in their establishments... just showing a sign and be "part of the buzz"
wich is something (being a fan) you couldnt do with Bell/Videotron and others.
That's where you're wrong IMO (I'm no lawyer), the radio station doesnt claim to be associated with... but Basha didnt claim to be either... and yet, basha is fined...
I think cases like this would be treated differently if it were to go to court... you could always pretend to just be a fan as what you're "sponsoring" is a sports franchise, not looking to make money... contrary to Cage aux Sports for example who is obviously making $ off sporting events shown in their establishments... just showing a sign and be "part of the buzz"
wich is something (being a fan) you couldnt do with Bell/Videotron and others.
How am I wrong? The restaurant owner claimed association by using the Habs logo in his advertising.
Actually no, if this were to go to court, the restaurant owner would be proven wrong and fined. Not the 89K that the Habs/NHL are requesting IMO, but more than a slap on the wrist.
Nice try, but claiming you're just "a fan", and had no intentions of benefiting/profiting from this type of advertising would not be a defense I would recommend.
Cage aux Sports I believe also has a sponsorship deal with the Habs. Meaning, they pay for their rights to advertise, using the Habs.
How am I wrong? The restaurant owner claimed association by using the Habs logo in his advertising.
Actually no, if this were to go to court, the restaurant owner would be proven wrong and fined. Not the 89K that the Habs/NHL are requesting IMO, but more than a slap on the wrist.
Nice try, but claiming you're just "a fan", and had no intentions of benefiting/profiting from this type of advertising would not be a defense I would recommend.
Cage aux Sports I believe also has a sponsorship deal with the Habs. Meaning, they pay for their rights to advertise, using the Habs.
Very good point (about the Cage aux Sports paying) <-- that to me answers why he couldnt get away with it. You can put up a sign that says go habs go or have the logo...
You CANNOT have it affilliated with the Restaurant, and it's entity.
In this case, he put the name on it, he had the guy on it... It was selling the food, and had the Canadiens all over it. <-- Corporate Law says That this is a nono.
Furthermore... That being said, it also means that I dont think the Habs would want to go close to this issue with a 30 foot pole, let alone a 10 footer.
That's where you're wrong IMO (I'm no lawyer), the radio station doesnt claim to be associated with... but Basha didnt claim to be either... and yet, basha is fined...
Basha hasn't been fined. The NHL has just begun the process of litigating him for trademark violations.
It's rarely in a corporation's interest to pursue these kinds of battles any farther than they need to go to achieve the end they want. If threats or initiating the legal process gets the message across (which it did in this case), it's not prudent to waste time and resources on dragging things out. It's very likely that the NHL will drop the case, or agree to a small settlement with Basha to address his unintentional wrongdoing.
That's a little different, Annakin Slayd isn't trying to advertise anything.
Also it's not about "relating to your fans", it's about protecting a registered name (logo). You allow this restaurant owner to do this, where does it stop?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI
But the radio station playing his song does though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLoblaw
But isn't he advertising himself? He's a musician by trade.. can you name one song of his that isn't Habs-related? He's getting tons of publicity through his affiliation with the Habs.
(not trying to knock him at all- but don't think the line can be so easily drawn)
If anything it's worse in the case of Annakin Slayd. He is directly benefiting from the publicity using the Habs trademark logos.
I know, because I did it with my band a few years back and Melnick still plays the core of the song on the radio. Our song was called Go Habs Go and the band's website at the time tripled in hits in two weeks.
So going after the Basha guy is retarted, basically. This isn't a logo like the Zeller's logo. You just can't compare them. It's an emblem, a source of pride for millions of people. It's different.
Besides it's good for the NHL. I fail to see how this hurts them in any way, shape or form. It's a good thing to stir up hype for your "product".
They are in the wrong here imo. And yes I know that legally no they are not. Morally I mean, and also in terms of the damage this lawsuit causes them in the public eye. They come across as a greedy giant going after Mr. Mclittle for the sake of "potential" money earned because of their logo. It's just bad business and lack of vision.
Very good point (about the Cage aux Sports paying) <-- that to me answers why he couldnt get away with it. You can put up a sign that says go habs go or have the logo...
You CANNOT have it affilliated with the Restaurant, and it's entity.
In this case, he put the name on it, he had the guy on it... It was selling the food, and had the Canadiens all over it. <-- Corporate Law says That this is a nono.
Furthermore... That being said, it also means that I dont think the Habs would want to go close to this issue with a 30 foot pole, let alone a 10 footer.
I'm not positive about Cage aux Sports, but I believe there is some sort of sponsorship deal between them and the Habs. Anyone feel free to correct me on this.
That's the bottom line, if he had hung a Habs jersey or pendant in his window, nothing would have been said. The fact that he incorporated the Habs logo/image together with his business without prior permission is why he's in hot water now.
Very good point (about the Cage aux Sports paying) <-- that to me answers why he couldnt get away with it. You can put up a sign that says go habs go or have the logo...
You CANNOT have it affilliated with the Restaurant, and it's entity.
In this case, he put the name on it, he had the guy on it... It was selling the food, and had the Canadiens all over it. <-- Corporate Law says That this is a nono.
Furthermore... That being said, it also means that I dont think the Habs would want to go close to this issue with a 30 foot pole, let alone a 10 footer.
That's a good point. After all the good will the Habs have in this community, something like this isn't worthwhile for them. That's why I was surprised to see Global reporting the NHL and the Habs pursuing damages. I haven't read through the entire thread, but can someone confirm if the NHL is acting alone or are the Habs also a party?
How am I wrong? The restaurant owner claimed association by using the Habs logo in his advertising.
Actually no, if this were to go to court, the restaurant owner would be proven wrong and fined. Not the 89K that the Habs/NHL are requesting IMO, but more than a slap on the wrist.
Nice try, but claiming you're just "a fan", and had no intentions of benefiting/profiting from this type of advertising would not be a defense I would recommend.
Cage aux Sports I believe also has a sponsorship deal with the Habs. Meaning, they pay for their rights to advertise, using the Habs.
same could be said about the guy who wrote the song, claiming assoc. by using Habs logo/images/videos. No ?
Actually, if my business was to sell Shawarmas (not beer, or fast food or sport equipment) I would play the fan card for sure. WHAT the guy is selling in his business is important. Him making more money because of the Ad has to be shown somehow. It's all about context.
tell me, do you REALLY think the guy sells more -> Shawarmas <- because of the Habs logo on his sign ? really...
I know about la Cage, only gave them as an example of a business making money off sporting events, as in there's no way such a business could pretend not to do it for $.
Yes he is advertising himself, as all singers do. In this case though, he's not claiming to be associated with the Habs. He could get in trouble for the video he made, as he used CBC footage that I'm sure he didn't get permission to use. That would be with CBC though, not the NHL or the Habs.
Actually I know he has a few other non-hockey related songs. I just don't know the names off hand.
Edit: Also since the Habs play his song at the games, I'm guessing they are okay with it.
I'm sure they are OK with it, but I don't think there is a huge difference between the song and Basha. Both can be said to infringe Habs IP rights. NHL went after one, but not the other.
That being said, I believe Basha is still in the wrong, but just a curious decision. If this is the NHL acting alone, then I understand. If the Habs are involved, then less so.
If anything it's worse in the case of Annakin Slayd. He is directly benefiting from the publicity using the Habs trademark logos.
I know, because I did it with my band a few years back and Melnick still plays the core of the song on the radio. Our song was called Go Habs Go and the band's website at the time tripled in hits in two weeks.
So going after the Basha guy is retarted, basically.
I'm not disagreeing, but according to the law, Annakin Slayd has every right to record this type of song. Just the same as your band had the right to record "Go Habs Go" (Is that on YT by the way?)
Going after the little guy (Basha) isn't right, but they have to use him as an example. I just don't understand why Basha didn't remove the banner when he received the first notice.
If anything it's worse in the case of Annakin Slayd. He is directly benefiting from the publicity using the Habs trademark logos.
I know, because I did it with my band a few years back and Melnick still plays the core of the song on the radio. Our song was called Go Habs Go and the band's website at the time tripled in hits in two weeks.
So going after the Basha guy is retarted, basically.
But Horton18Horton is right for sure about one thing... He committed the offense when he placed BOTH Basha & Canadiens on the same article. Cage aux Sports who probably was the one who said to look in to it... as they pay MONEY to do the same thing.
I was in Montreal last spring during the run, and there was a tonne of things saying go habs go... but it was a flag here, in chalk there... In no way did they try to do what Bashra did (not that I could see) granted... innocently. But imagine being the Cage aux Sports, paying for that right, then watching that right be freely given to EVERYONE else around you. That would be infuriating.
I'm not disagreeing, but according to the law, Annakin Slayd has every right to record this type of song. Just the same as your band had the right to record "Go Habs Go" (Is that on YT by the way?)
Going after the little guy (Basha) isn't right, but they have to use him as an example. I just don't understand why Basha didn't remove the banner when he received the first notice.
I added to my post afterwards it kind of replies to yours so I'll just repost.
"Besides it's good for the NHL. I fail to see how this hurts them in any way, shape or form. It's a good thing to stir up hype for your "product".
They are in the wrong here imo. And yes I know that legally no they are not. Morally I mean, and also in terms of the damage this lawsuit causes them in the public eye. They come across as a greedy giant going after Mr. Mclittle for the sake of "potential" money earned because of their logo. It's just bad business and lack of vision."
**** if anything they should ENCOURAGE this type of stuff.
same could be said about the guy who wrote the song, claiming assoc. by using Habs logo/images/videos. No ?
Actually, if my business was to sell Shawarmas (not beer, or fast food or sport equipment) I would play the fan card for sure. WHAT the guy is selling in his business is important. Him making more money because of the Ad has to be shown somehow. It's all about context.
tell me, do you REALLY think the guy sells more -> Shawarmas <- because of the Habs logo on his sign ? really...
I know about la Cage, only gave them as an example of a business making money off sporting events, as in there's no way such a business could pretend not to do it for $.
La Cage IMO wouldnt be as offended about a folksinger singing songs about the habs, They COULD be offended by that Bashra's sign though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigger77
I added to my post afterwards it kind of replies to yours so I'll just repost.
"Besides it's good for the NHL. I fail to see how this hurts them in any way, shape or form. It's a good thing to stir up hype for your "product".
They are in the wrong here imo. And yes I know that legally no they are not. Morally I mean, and also in terms of the damage this lawsuit causes them in the public eye. They come across as a greedy giant going after Mr. Mclittle for the sake of "potential" money earned because of their logo. It's just bad business and lack of vision."
What if it was La Cage Aux Sports that ASKED the team to do something about it, or they will pull their corporate financial aid? What if La Cage Aux Sports feels that if EVERYONE gets away with doing it for free... Why cant they?
Bashra's probably wouldnt have gotten any trouble if all the big sign said was 'Go Habs Go' or just the CH.
The trouble is when you add the things that are Bashra's specific. That's where the fine line IS being crossed.
I'm sure they are OK with it, but I don't think there is a huge difference between the song and Basha. Both can be said to infringe Habs IP rights. NHL went after one, but not the other.
That being said, I believe Basha is still in the wrong, but just a curious decision. If this is the NHL acting alone, then I understand. If the Habs are involved, then less so.
There is a difference, but I'd say it's like comparing apples and bowling balls. One is benefiting from singing about the Habs and their fans. While the other is benefiting by using the Habs logo and incorporating into their business.
In other words, Annakin Slayd isn't claiming to be affiliated with the Habs. While Basha, innocent or not, is claiming to be by using the Habs logo in his advertising banner.
I'm not sure, because I've read two articles about this so far. One says the NHL is involved, the other states that this was started by the Habs.
I'm not disagreeing, but according to the law, Annakin Slayd has every right to record this type of song. Just the same as your band had the right to record "Go Habs Go" (Is that on YT by the way?)
Going after the little guy (Basha) isn't right, but they have to use him as an example. I just don't understand why Basha didn't remove the banner when he received the first notice.
Dont know either and It would have been the smart thing to do... but hey! for all we know he went to Rona to buy a can of red paint the next day to get rid of it quickly and then forgot about "completing the task"...
or he could be just trying to extend as much as he can to get more exposure.
There's one thing though, I havent read anything about the guy receiving a "first notice", I missed something ?
Dont know either and It would have been the smart thing to do... but hey! for all we know he went to Rona to buy a can of red paint the next day to get rid of it quickly and then forgot about "completing the task"...
or he could be just trying to extend as much as he can to get more exposure.
There's one thing though, I havent read anything about the guy receiving a "first notice", I missed something ?
That's pretty much what it looks like to me, as you can still clearly see the CH through the paint.
In the link that BobLoblaw provided. It says that Basha tried to conceal the logo, after receiving a complain from the Habs. It doesn't say how long ago the complaint was sent.
