The Rapids Who Cried Wolf
As I mentioned yesterday, KSE decided against changing the Colorado Rapids name to something involving Arsenal. As Soccer by Ives nicely words it, just call them the Colorado Boys Who Cried Wolf. It's an interesting soap opera that involves over the top PR and so-called leaks of a new web site branded as "Colorado Arsenal" at their new domain names such as http://www.coloradoarsenal.com. One thing that I haven't confirmed in the media is the relationship between Arsenal and Nike. If it's like the one Deloitte mentions that Barcelona and Nike have (it would stand to reason it is; but it's not for sure), it would mean that the image rights for Arsenal are owned by a joint venture between Arsenal and Nike. And if, as it appears, the Rapids were well down the road in changing their name it then begs the question as to how they didn't realize they would have to negotiate with this join venture and anticipate the problems they would face in getting Nike on board with the name change.
3 comments:
…..”it would mean that the image rights for Arsenal are owned by a joint venture between Arsenal and Nike.’
Having joint ownership of the “image rights” (i.e. the logo, or the “mark” as it is known in trademark circles) is different that having ownership rights to the name (‘Arsenal’).
Clearly there is no similarity between the Arsenal FC logo, and the leaked Arsenal Colorado logo, which would give rise to any reasonable infringement claim. As such, I highly doubt that Nike’s joint ownership of the Arsenal FC mark (or image) stopped the Rapids from changing their name to Arsenal Colorado (or something similar), unless the Colorado franchise also planned to use the same Arsenal logo (which doesn’t appear to have been considered).
My guess is that the reasons why the Rapids didn’t go to Arsenal Colorado are as fictitious as their leaked Arsenal Colorado web site. I’d bet that this was all a Marketing hoax to garner attention around their new image. Considering that the Arsenal rumor had been out there since it was announced that the stadium would be built on the former Rocky Mountain Arsenal, and then further fueled by Not Doug Logan, it was an easy sell for them.
I think you can safely be critical of the Rapids PR strategy (or player development, or team performance, etc.). However, I don’t think it would be fair to question their competence of international trademark law.
Actually it's not a matter of international trademark law. From my understanding Arsenal (England) has copyrights to it's name and image in the US, That is, they've filed copyrights in the states. KSE would've needed to come to an agreement with them to use the name, not just just the logo.
That aside, this is at best a planned out marketing ploy. Did they get attention? Sure. But so does a 14 year old teenage girl who dresses up as a tart. Attention in itself isn't a good thing. A couple weeks ago when the Rapids announced the MLS All-Star Game, I heard them in the news for the first time on Colorado Public Radio. No playing around, no guerilla marketing, no games and they got as much press as they've ever had about an event.
What results did they get from this? How many more season tickets did they sell as a result? How many more jerseys? How did this strengthen their brand? We can discuss the symnatics until we're blue in the face. But at the end of the day no matter what we call it we have a franchise that has seen butts in the seats go down by 15% in 3 years. How did all this playing around change that?
Trust me, I don’t disagree that the Rapids Marketing and PR machine needs more than a little grease. They have spent practically no money or effort promoting the team, which as resulted in their inability to build a solid fan base or sell season ticket packages. Their player development is mediocre at best, and Clavijo (for having a solid reputation as a great talent scout) hasn’t really brought in any REAL impact players, and is no better than a serviceable coach. The franchise is weak, and without a stadium deal in place, they would have surely been moved out of the Denver area.
However, you’re wrong in stating that it would not be a trademark issue. There is a real difference between a copyright and a trademark. A copyright generally covers authorship in a tangible form of expression (poems, novels, plays, movies, songs). Trademarks on the other hand are intended to cover the use of logos, phrases, and names as they are used in commerce (to protect the buyer from knowing who is selling the goods or services).
As such, in this case the Arsenal logo (or jointly owned image as you mentioned) would be a trademark (not a copyright). Further, the name “Arsenal FC” and “Arsenal” are both trademarked in the US by Arsenal Football Club PLC (see attached link to the US Trademark Database).
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=8punpo.2.1
With that said, it is fully possible that Nike and Arsenal FC PLC have entered into a separate agreement that would give Nike control over how the Arsenal brand (name/logo) is utilized in commerce (i.e. you can’t the Arsenal logo on an Adidas kit). However, Nike would have no basis for a claim against Kroenke Sports Enterprises using the name “Arsenal Colorado” unless one of the following four things were true:
1) Nike owned the trademark to the name Arsenal (Not true),
2) Arsenal Colorado desired to utilize Arsenal FC’s logo (Doesn’t appear to be true),
3) Arsenal FC PLC assigned its rights to make a claim of infringement against third party use of the Arsenal name or logo (Highly unlikely), or
4) Arsenal FC PLC was going to take a majority ownership stake in the Colorado franchise, and its agreement with Nike was broad enough to cover future acquisitions (Highly Unlikely)
To further make my point, there are over a half dozen other professional soccer teams in the world that utilize the name Arsenal in their name, and it doesn’t appear as if Nike or Arsenal are attempting to claim infringement against them. This, more than anything else, serves to prove to me that Nike/Arsenal had nothing to do with this. The more likely scenario is that they never intended to change their name in the first place, and simply used the idea of “Arsenal Colorado” to build momentum for their campaign (again I think it was a stupid marketing gimmick)
To your comment: “And if, as it appears, the Rapids were well down the road in changing their name it then begs the question as to how they didn't realize they would have to negotiate with this join venture and anticipate the problems they would face in getting Nike on board with the name change.”
As I’ve mentioned, I don’t think the Rapids were ever “well down the road in changing their name”. However, assuming that they WERE, the Rapids would not be privy to the terms of any agreement between Nike and Arsenal unless such terms were make public (which does not appear to be the case). As such, it would be illogical to assume that the Rapids should have realized that they would need to negotiate with the joint venture, unless either Arsenal or Nike made the Rapids aware of the agreement between the parties.
Post a Comment