re: The NFL forcing people to call it “The Big Game”

“Laches, an equitable doctrine that an infringer may assert when a trademark owner inexcusably “sleeps on its rights” and the delay prejudices the infringer.”

The way I read that (IANAL) is if the TM owner sleeps on enforcement and the infringer invests in exploitation of the TM, the infringer may end up getting an implied license… for free. (Lawyers of the OT please elaborate and correct me if I wrong)

Just call it the stupor bowl lol

quote:

---

The Big Game

---

The funny thing is the phrase Superbowl comes from the Super Ball.



The NFL owners struggled to find a name, using “AFL-NFL World Championship Game” for the first two. Lamar Hunt, original owner of the Chiefs, had kids that played with a Super Ball and he came up with the idea of "Super Bowl". But nobody in NFL management much liked the name, and they kept trying to think of something better. It was such a catchy name that people just used it, and the NFL gave in and finally called the third championship game the Super Bowl (the Namath game). It's one of the first memories I have, I had a Super Ball and my father thought it funny as hell that "Super Bowl" came from it. Now the NFL wants to treat it as something sacred.

quote:

---

In trademark law if you do not protect your trademark, and others begin to use it, then you can outright lose the trademark. Since they do not want to lose a valuable trademark, they defend it. It's like if you owned a large plot of unused land and someone squatted on it, you'd be wise to get them off immediately and not wait until you need to use the land, because they can make an argument it's theirs.

---

The. Why not “license” its use for $1 for use in tangential ways. I’m not talking about where it’s a focus but in a commercial where “big game” has to be used license it cheaply.

The Big Game sounds like a name for a wrestler or a rapper.

Who are they forcing to say this?

Not me

As others have said it is more about trademark law vs copyright.

Under trademark law you can have infringement where the competing uses arguably create a likelihood of confusion in the minds of consumers. It is unfair for a junior user to “ride on the coattails” of the senior user and possibly confuse consumers.

But there is also the concept of trademark dilution wherein the unauthorized use of a mark can dilute the strength and, ultimately, the value of the mark. This is mostly (but not exclusively) what the NFL is trying to protect.

There is also the concept of fair use which is mostly a copyright issue but also has some application in trademark law. Most news reports could probably fall back on this but when the use has commercial benefit to the user that often cuts against the fair use exception

So does this somehow not apply to the World Series or other championships/major games?

Why is the Super Bowl the only one this applies to?