MLB cracks down on unlicensed little league jerseys

[DatHoser]

MLB's knockdown pitch

 

I was originally going to put this in the "What's Bugging You" thread, but there's some debate here. I for one was enraged after initially hearing this story. I still think MLB is screwing up royally, but I can kinda see their point. In the end, MLB could end up alienating their youngest fans, not to mention their core buyers in the future. While I can see they would want to prevent rampant copyright infringment, something should have been worked out because this is not the only little league that uses MLB names.

[Brian the Automator]

It's about time they put the clamps down on those theiving kids. Today, stealing MLB trademarks... tomorrow, addicted to meth.

[sbrylski]

In my little league, we all had the name of our town on the front and on the hats, and then were nicknamed after a MLB team. Seems like a jeez, why?, stupid action by the MLB to me though.

[DatHoser]

Brian, that sounds suspiciously like Weird Al's "Don't Download This Song." http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/tongue.gif Bud Selig=RIAA?

 

Our own little league switched from MLB names to minor league names this year. I wonder if there was any connection.

[jwill535]

It has to do with trade mark rules. You have to protect your trade mark in all instances or risk losing it. It is the same reason the UW goes after schools that use the motion W. Now all the MLB would need to do is give permission. UW tends to give permission to use the logo as long as that school doesn't profit off the use of the logo.

[jazzytrav]

That's weird. I guess that's just one more time in my life where I'm guilty of copyright infringement. I was on a team called the Brewers, Orioles, White Sox, and who knows what else. Oh wait, can I say those names on here?

 

Nice avatar Brian http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[dadofandrew]

If they wanted to do so, they would have to buy jerseys from Majestic Athletic, the exclusive apparel licensee of MLB, which would have been more expensive.

 

They are not clamping down at all, just making them use the company that pays MLB for their trademarks. I can't believe anyone was using it without paying for it, that's a huge violation. Kinko's won't make a copy from a book.

[sgtcluels]

Best Avatar Ever Brian.

 

Going to St Louis?

[Brian the Automator]

They are not clamping down at all, just making them use the company that pays MLB for their trademarks. I can't believe anyone was using it without paying for it, that's a huge violation. Kinko's won't make a copy from a book.

You would think that MLB would work out a deal were amateur teams below a certain age level would be able to use their trademarks for no charge... Otherwise, they're simply putting a roadblock in the way of getting kids to play the game that will ultimately fund them. It just seems like it's shortsightedness. It's not like they're going to start offering jerseys of their little league teams for re-sale in adult sizes, and say it's simply the jersey for their little league team.

[bball123h2]

I'm pretty sure the problem arose when the Wilson Park Brewers were sponsored by Art's Performing Center, and thus the Brewers and Art's were forever linked via miniature tshirts.

 

This does seem like a good way to alienate kids, although I remember being pretty unhappy when I found out I was on the Expos. To this day I cannot stand the sight of Delino DeShields.

[Invader3K]

It has to do with trade mark rules. You have to protect your trade mark in all instances or risk losing it. It is the same reason the UW goes after schools that use the motion W. Now all the MLB would need to do is give permission. UW tends to give permission to use the logo as long as that school doesn't profit off the use of the logo.

Agreed. It is lame...but the courts have decided over the years that if a company isn't proactive about protecting their claims, they can lose their rights to them.

[mothershipconnection]

You would think that MLB would work out a deal were amateur teams below a certain age level would be able to use their trademarks for no charge...

 

They could be pretty restrictive with the jerseys, but I don't like them blocking the use of names. I mean, you could say it can only be in white letters in times new roman font. Having a big league name for your team is one of the cool parts of little league for most kids.

[temke]

my little league had the hats of the teams we played for, but the uni's were generic.

 

how about some deals with new era and/or majestic where they can use the MLB stuff as long as it comes from those companies.

 

nobody is harmed. MLB and their partners get their dough, and the kids get to "play" for a MLB team

[InsomniacInkRoss]

Take the kids completely out of the equation

 

Majestic payed a LOT of money to get the rights, no one else should make a PROFIT off them

 

If you could prove the uniforms were done for cost, I would be OK with it, but I think that would too hard to regulate and monitor

 

100% with Majestic, MLB, and the law

[Bikeage77]

I can see how putting the actual MLB team logo on the jersey would be an infringement, but I think it's ridiculous that you can't have some cursive font that says an MLB team name on it. I played Tosa League and we just had some colored jersey and one year our division was all NFL names, the next was MLB names.

 

But as a kid when I was on the White Sox, even though I couldn't wear the hat during a game, I wanted a White Sox hat, to represent my team off the field. To ban the logos that's one thing, the team name is what really gets me.

 

As far as hats, there are plenty of off shoot cheaper hats that are all licensed by MLB, couldn't they use those?

 

I also wonder how much the kids will notice this, it might not even matter, but since we're all older and remember our team teams and whatever, we'd want our kids to have actual team names instead of the bulldogs or something lame.

[InsomniacInkRoss]

Well, I don't know everything about the matter, but I don't know that you can really ban the use of names like "Cubs" and "Tigers." I think a different design with that name would stand up in court, but I am sure no one wants to try.

 

I don't think there is a problem with buying licensed stuff and wearing it, in terms of hats. If you marry a hat with a "generic" uniform though, I think that shows you are not that "generic"

 

I never played little league, but I would not have wanted to on a real team other than the Brewers or Indians, why would a kid in Milwaukee want to be an A or a Ranger?

[brewcrew00]

I don't know that I see what the big deal is? Where I grew up playing baseball, the teams were named after local businesses in the area. Easy sponsorship, cheap, and I think it was pretty good advertising. Taking away the professional names isn't the biggest deal in the world.

 

The only unfortunate thing about all this is it affects the kids, who don't understand the issue anyway. I wish there was some way around having them be the fall out.

[DatHoser]

I never played little league, but I would not have wanted to on a real team other than the Brewers or Indians, why would a kid in Milwaukee want to be an A or a Ranger?

Last year in little league, my son played for the Diamondbacks and loved it (he is a Brewer fan through and through). Because of that team name, he began watching how the major league team did and even cheered for them, except against our crew. Also, the jerseys last year were t-shirts with the DB logo on the front with a sponsor on the back. This year all jerseys are Majestic with the (minor league) logo on the front and league logo on the back. The entrance fee has also gone up over 50% with a lot of parents griping about that. I have no qualms about Majestic and licensing as they have every right to make money from the little leagues on this, but when it costs over $200 just to have two kids in little league wear official licensed t-shirt and hat, that's nuts! With MLB tooting their PR horn all the time (we've all seen the Prince commercial), why can't they and Majestic work out something a little more palatable with the leagues rather than squeezing every last penny they can. I've talked to other parents and I'm not the only one with a bad taste in their mouth. Maybe next year we should just go with generic jerseys with hopefully non-trademarked team names. Skunks vs. worms, anyone?

 

[Brian the Automator]

Flanders: Who are we?

His Football Team: The Wildcats!

Flanders: Who are we going to beat?

His Football Team: The Wildcats!

[DatHoser]

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif Thanks Brian, I needed that!

 

 

[RU Rah Rah]

You would think that a Cub or ChiSox player would step into the breach and spring for the licensed uni's. But, wait -- they probably don't make enough to help. Never mind....

[dvoiss]

You would think that MLB would work out a deal were amateur teams below a certain age level would be able to use their trademarks for no charge...

 

They could be pretty restrictive with the jerseys, but I don't like them blocking the use of names.

Yeah how can they trademark the name Cubs. Will teachers be able to tell kids what a baby bear is called without facing trademark infringement violations. When I was in Little League we not only used the team names but wore patches with the MLB team logos on our hats. Bud has taken this a bit too far I'm afraid.

[jwill535]

I am pretty sure this has more to do with teams using the logos then it is with the names. Again in order to maintain a trademark you have to enforce it every time in order to avoid the risk of losing it.

[jazzytrav]

Yeah how can they trademark the name Cubs. Will teachers be able to tell kids what a baby bear is called without facing trademark infringement violations.

Teaching kids what a baby bear is called has nothing to do with baseball. The little leaguers were using the name Cubs as an obvious representation of the MLB team. I still don't agree with the whole thing, but the example you provided are two completely different situations.