4 ms·

So the organisers want hinder anyone from talking about their event? That seems a really bad and counter productive decision.

aftoprokrustes 3y ago
Indeed, I wonder what is the reason. The only explanation I can think of would be that the event is already widely advertised by "authorized" partnering media - who thus have an interest in preserving the aura of the event - and scaring everyone unauthorized of trying to mention the event might be a disguised way to avoid critics. If you cannot name the super bowl, you cannot write an article about its ecological impact, the commercial revenues, the working conditions, etc. But I have absolutely no knowledge about the event, so if anyone has a more informed opinion, I would be very interested.
- dtagames 3y ago
  The restriction is on using their trademarked term to advertise another commercial product. Take snacks, for example. Frito-Lay can put an endcap at the grocery store to promote chips for the game and it can have a huge "GAME DAY" banner overhead, or even "THE BIG GAME." But if they were to write Super Bowl to try and associate the NFL's brand with their brand for the purpose of selling stuff, they'd find themselves quickly in court. The article is dumb because it misses this very important point. Yes, it's ok for you and me to write about the Super Bowl in many contexts, but it's not ok for us to appropriate their branding for our own commercial gain -- and most people who own IP would be probably be ok with that.
bubble12345 3y ago
Super Bowl is a trademark of NFL, and to keep a trademark you need to "defend" it. Which lawyers presumably interpret as sending cease and desist letters every now and then
- Gormo 3y ago
  But the caveat is that trademark law only applies to usages that are likely to cause confusion within the same product category, or to imply some endorsement/connection with the trademark holder. People using your brand to refer to your product in normal modes of communication isn't a violation of your trademark in the first place, and does not need to be defended against.

aftoprokrustes 3y ago

Indeed, I wonder what is the reason. The only explanation I can think of would be that the event is already widely advertised by "authorized" partnering media - who thus have an interest in preserving the aura of the event - and scaring everyone unauthorized of trying to mention the event might be a disguised way to avoid critics. If you cannot name the super bowl, you cannot write an article about its ecological impact, the commercial revenues, the working conditions, etc. But I have absolutely no knowledge about the event, so if anyone has a more informed opinion, I would be very interested.

dtagames 3y ago
The restriction is on using their trademarked term to advertise another commercial product. Take snacks, for example. Frito-Lay can put an endcap at the grocery store to promote chips for the game and it can have a huge "GAME DAY" banner overhead, or even "THE BIG GAME." But if they were to write Super Bowl to try and associate the NFL's brand with their brand for the purpose of selling stuff, they'd find themselves quickly in court. The article is dumb because it misses this very important point. Yes, it's ok for you and me to write about the Super Bowl in many contexts, but it's not ok for us to appropriate their branding for our own commercial gain -- and most people who own IP would be probably be ok with that.

bubble12345 3y ago

Super Bowl is a trademark of NFL, and to keep a trademark you need to "defend" it. Which lawyers presumably interpret as sending cease and desist letters every now and then

Gormo 3y ago
But the caveat is that trademark law only applies to usages that are likely to cause confusion within the same product category, or to imply some endorsement/connection with the trademark holder. People using your brand to refer to your product in normal modes of communication isn't a violation of your trademark in the first place, and does not need to be defended against.