Couldnt WWE sue TNA over this?

[Shaggy]

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/5979/xdivisionlrghc2.jpg

https://secure15.nexternal.com/shared/StoreFront/default.asp?CS=dns&BusType=BtoC&Count1=800380885&Count2=717521309&CategoryID=2&Target=products.asp

That X-Division shirt was obviously designed to look like the DX shirt....

[Volare]

When Vince sees that....he'll try to slap a lawsuit on TNA faster than you can say Six Sides Sucks

[The One]

$50 says Vince might hear about the shirt, but will never actually look at the shirt in question...

But yeah law suites are comin!

[Kalyx triaD]

Why sue? It makes TNA look even more like the 'D Show' it is. They're just admitting the influence WWE (and DX for that matter) has on merch and public awareness. If Vince sues it would be a bonus for him, but I wouldn't bother. I'd laugh my ass to another PPV.

[M-A-G]

I sure hope so.

[Boondock Saint]

I thought it said Jew Generation X at first glance.

[El Fangel]

The answers are most likely and ummmm....most likely.
Now I know this has been done before but...


Chris FUCKING Daniels, and Sabin.

[Destor]

Parody

[Kane Knight]

Parody

Legally, the makers of a parody still have to pay licensing rights, they just don't have to have permission.

Go figure.

Anyway, it's a stretch to say this actually infringes on established trademarks, and all Vince would do is give free publicity to TNA. I doubt anything'll come of this.

[Destor]

So SNL/Leno/etc. have to have rights to do the things they do? :?:

[Petethegeekstreet]

They could but like KK said, it would only benifit TNA really.

[Kane Knight]

So SNL/Leno/etc. have to have rights to do the things they do? :?:

Last I knew, Leno wasn't marketing T-Shirts based on other people's intellectual properties.

[Destor]

So they own the letter X and the phrase "Two words..."

[Dave Youell]

So they own the letter X and the phrase "Two words..."
Yes

I however still own the letter F and i'm not giving it back

[TerranRich]

Legally, the makers of a parody still have to pay licensing rights, they just don't have to have permission.

Go figure.

Anyway, it's a stretch to say this actually infringes on established trademarks, and all Vince would do is give free publicity to TNA. I doubt anything'll come of this.
Ooh, do I get to prove KK wrong? *prances with glee*

Although a parody can be considered a derivative work under United States Copyright Law, it can be protected under the fair use doctrine, which is codified in 17 USC § 107. The Supreme Court of the United States stated that parody "is the use of some elements of a prior author's composition to create a new one that, at least in part, comments on that author's works." That commentary function provides some justification for use of the older work. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.

In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit, in Suntrust v. Houghton Mifflin, upheld the right of Alice Randall to publish a parody of Gone with the Wind called The Wind Done Gone, which told the same story from the point of view of Scarlett O'Hara's slaves, who were glad to be rid of her.

See:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/11th/0112200opnv2.html
...and the Wikipedia article on Parody (with sources cited at bottom).

Nowhere does it say they had to pay licensing fees for their parody. And further research lends me to believe that no makers of parodies require to pay any kind of fee. It's covered under "Fair Use" in U.S. law.

Unless you were talking about UK law or some other law, in which case I haven't the faintest fucking clue. :)

[Better Than You]

OOOOh pwnd

[Kane Knight]

So they own the letter X and the phrase "Two words..."

Only in the same sense that Pink Floyd own "Another Brick in the Wall."

That is, my single-celled friend, within the contexts of the shirt, it is easy enough to prove this infringes on already established intellectual property.

[Kane Knight]

Ooh, do I get to prove KK wrong? *prances with glee*



See:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/11th/0112200opnv2.html
...and the Wikipedia article on Parody (with sources cited at bottom).

Nowhere does it say they had to pay licensing fees for their parody. And further research lends me to believe that no makers of parodies require to pay any kind of fee. It's covered under "Fair Use" in U.S. law.

Unless you were talking about UK law or some other law, in which case I haven't the faintest fucking clue. :)

You didn't prove me wrong, you just said you didn't see any mention of royalties. Wake me up when you've actually PROVED it, instead of being a whiny little 'tard.

[Kane Knight]

Though interestingly enough, your links do prove that this is not guaranteed to be protected as an act of parody.

[TerranRich]

You can wake up now...

Fair Use

In federal copyright law 17 U.S.C. §§101 et seq., refers to specific use of copyrighted materials without payment of royalties or which otherwise does not constitute an infringement of copyright; ...

[Kane Knight]

Ohhh...Answers.com. BRILLIANT. I didn't see that anywhere on the US actual web page. Hmmmm...

And even your own answer gives an "or" there. I don't know, this seems far from actual proof. Note that's a catch-all for fair use, not copyright specifically.

[The Show Off]

Yes

I however still own the letter F and i'm not giving it back

F YOU!!

Damnit.

Hands Dave 20 bucks.

[TerranRich]

Oy vey. The TNA shirt doesn't even use specific logos. They may have copied the STYLE, but that's far from infringement. They DO own their X-Division logo, I'm sure.

[Disturbed316]

TNA needs to just stop being a bunch of fags by constantly taking shots at Vince and WWE, and concentrate on their own product.

It shows they are desperate and they look pathetic. Having their guys say "Oooh I used to wrestle for Vince and he was a bastard, but I love TNA, I want to fuck the management in the ass. TNA RULESSS!! WWE SUX!!!"

Seriously, I wish TNA would just either die or stop acting so pathetic and childish.

[Jaton]

I can't believe no one has pointed out that idiotic fucking look on Sabins face.

[Kalyx triaD]

Sabin looks like an idiot.

[Volare]

Dunno...he could be just looking normal...which to us, he looks like an idiot

[Kane Knight]

Oy vey. The TNA shirt doesn't even use specific logos.

You don't need specific logos. You can get sued for the wrong word in the wrong FONT.

It seems stypid, but it's law.

[FourFifty]

Oy vey

Dude, my people say that, not you. I want 20 bucks on behalf of the Jewish community.

[Kane Knight]

I think it's parody. First you'll have to prove it's not protected speech.

[Crippla]

I doubt WWE would win a lawsuit if they file one for this.

[Kane Knight]

I doubt WWE would win a lawsuit if they file one for this.

Sometimes it's not about winning.

[M-A-G]

TNA needs to just stop being a bunch of fags by constantly taking shots at Vince and WWE, and concentrate on their own product.

It shows they are desperate and they look pathetic. Having their guys say "Oooh I used to wrestle for Vince and he was a bastard, but I love TNA, I want to fuck the management in the ass. TNA RULESSS!! WWE SUX!!!"

Seriously, I wish TNA would just either die or stop acting so pathetic and childish.

Best....post....ever....

...so far.

[M-A-G]

Sometimes it's not about winning.

IT'S ABOUT BEING NUMBER 1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Shadow]

It's really hard to sue yourself.

But if Vince wants to I guess he can.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I think TNA could get away with this. I mean, couldn't Marvel sue the WWE for using DX, claiming they own X-Men, and thus people would get confused?

Maybe if the shirt more specifically played off the DX concept, and was green and black or had the quote "I've got two words for ya'...No Limits!". The shirt doesn't directly play off DX's success, and even if the WWE did draw the connection, it is more media attention for TNA, something the WWE doesn't want. They could probably argue it away, anyway. If a Cola company puts a red label on its brand, would Coca Cola be able to sue?

[Kane Knight]

Decent example: The makers of Zoom were sued by Marvel for infringment upon The Fantastic Four. What's better, they said the books "Zoom's Academy" or whatever didn't qualify as infringement.

Trademark infringement is a touchy thing. On the one hand, you can lose a suit for a passing similarity. On the other, you can get away with borderline plagiarism. Another example, more of the latter, is the Captain America rip-off that was made by a former captain America writer. I don't remember the name, but the character was dressed similar to captain America, and carried a shield with a SSB motif. A judge in this case ruled that it was okay, provided the character never threw the shield.

However, a Darkwing Duck episode was pulled because it played on Spider-Man (Radioactive Spider).

But long story short: No. In the case of Trademark law, it's all about market confusion. Marvel would have to prove that DX and the X-Men were within the same market and were similar enough to draw some form of endorsement, detract from business, or cause some form of similar "market confusion" effect.

The two are not similar enough for someone to draw that conclusion reasonably. A shirt with a big green X and "Two Words?" Yeah, this would be a lot easier to argue in court.

[Destor]

Big RED x ;)

[Hanso Amore]

When I am elected high Chanchellor of Earth, this will not be a problem.

Vote for Hanso 2078

"A vote for me, is a vote against the parasitic aliens that destroyed our way of life"

[YOUR Hero]

If 'Vince' thought he could sue and win, he still might not simply because he'd be giving TNA publicity.

[Kane Knight]

If 'Vince' thought he could sue and win, he still might not simply because he'd be giving TNA publicity.

Risk assessment. Vince could damage them, or he could help them. And I'm betting he'd rather ignore them than risk giving them a shot in the arm with publicity. Even though I guarantee this lawsuit would mean very little in terms of publicity, because wrestling isn't trendy enough to deal with in terms of mainstream media.

[Fox]

The two are not similar enough for someone to draw that conclusion reasonably. A shirt with a big green X and "Two Words?" Yeah, this would be a lot easier to argue in court.


Red X. Not green. D-Generation-X's trademark colors have always been black and bright green.

[Kane Knight]

Red X. Not green. D-Generation-X's trademark colors have always been black and bright green.

Thank you, you're only a day behind Destor pointing that out.

[Blue Demon]

probably a waste of time...