Texas A&M now going after the Colts

Not just the Seahawks now. I think there's a point where people will start thinking of Texas A&M as nothing more than a bunch of litigating whiners.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/12/us-texas-colts-idUSKCN0T12QL20151112

Hopefully, the judge will realize the only thing tarnishing the "12th man" image is the play of ATM.

They're just patent trolling with something they didn't even invent. Like Apple, except without the financial success.

The trademark system is completely @#$%ed up in this country. Not long ago, the video game company King, who owns that POS F2P game Candy Crush Saga filed to trademark the words "candy" and "saga" and actually tried to sue older companies that were using the words in their products before King even existed for trademark infringment before they were even granted the trademarks. Such bull@#$%.

Maulbert":33d40q28 said:

The trademark system is completely @#$%ed up in this country. Not long ago, the video game company King, who owns that POS F2P game Candy Crush Saga filed to trademark the words "candy" and "saga" and actually tried to sue older companies that were using the words in their products before King even existed for trademark infringment before they were even granted the trademarks. Such bull@#$%.

Click to expand...

Patents in software are especially bad.

So, taking the required steps to defend a trademark is now whining?

Would you expect PA to defend 12's?

And if not, why do the Hawks own it?

A & M were not the first to use it, it was around a long time, they were the first to patent it, I think awarding them it was a mistake. They just extort money now from other programs that use the common phrase.

chris98251":1gqp2a8m said:

A & M were not the first to use it, it was around a long time, they were the first to patent it, I think awarding them it was a mistake. They just extort money now from other programs that use the common phrase.

Click to expand...

Do you think it is wrong for the Hawks to have a trademark on "12's"?

DTexHawk":bd5puk9j said:

chris98251":bd5puk9j said:

A & M were not the first to use it, it was around a long time, they were the first to patent it, I think awarding them it was a mistake. They just extort money now from other programs that use the common phrase.

Click to expand...

Do you think it is wrong for the Hawks to have a trademark on "12's"?

Click to expand...

It would be totally unnecessary if not for A&M's incessant bitchfest. The government should not even permit commonly derived phrases, like 12th man in football or 6th man in basketball or three-peat for three repeat championships, to be monopolized by one entity. A&M should not own the phrase 12th Man any more than the dozens of other football teams who have used the phrase since the 11-man-per-team game was invented.

DTexHawk":2x14tszf said:

chris98251":2x14tszf said:

A & M were not the first to use it, it was around a long time, they were the first to patent it, I think awarding them it was a mistake. They just extort money now from other programs that use the common phrase.

Click to expand...

Do you think it is wrong for the Hawks to have a trademark on "12's"?

Click to expand...

Trademarks on phrases are silly for the most part. Unless it is an actual brand I don't see the point. Every time I hear of someone filing a trademark patent I think of Trump trying to do it with "You're Fired", which is asinine.

hawknation2015":2nzp0581 said:

DTexHawk":2nzp0581 said:

chris98251":2nzp0581 said:

A & M were not the first to use it, it was around a long time, they were the first to patent it, I think awarding them it was a mistake. They just extort money now from other programs that use the common phrase.

Click to expand...

Do you think it is wrong for the Hawks to have a trademark on "12's"?

Click to expand...

It would be totally unnecessary if not for A&M's incessant bitchfest. The government should not even permit commonly derived phrases, like 12th man in football or 6th man in basketball or three-peat for three repeat championships, to be monopolized by one entity. A&M should not own the phrase 12th Man any more than the dozens of other football teams who have used the phrase since the 11-man-per-team game was invented.

Click to expand...

So you're saying Hawks are wrong also.

Only reason seattle should do it is to protect themselves from some other assholes doing it to get money out of them. A&M for example...

DTexHawk":haujjfdz said:

hawknation2015":haujjfdz said:

DTexHawk":haujjfdz said:

chris98251":haujjfdz said:

A & M were not the first to use it, it was around a long time, they were the first to patent it, I think awarding them it was a mistake. They just extort money now from other programs that use the common phrase.

Click to expand...

Do you think it is wrong for the Hawks to have a trademark on "12's"?

Click to expand...

It would be totally unnecessary if not for A&M's incessant bitchfest. The government should not even permit commonly derived phrases, like 12th man in football or 6th man in basketball or three-peat for three repeat championships, to be monopolized by one entity. A&M should not own the phrase 12th Man any more than the dozens of other football teams who have used the phrase since the 11-man-per-team game was invented.

Click to expand...

So you're saying Hawks are wrong also.

Click to expand...

The Seahawks were perfectly willing to share the 12th Man with A&M and any other football team that elected to use the commonly derived phrase. They were forced to seek a trademark for 12s (no apostrophe) in order to protect their use of the derivation of the phrase from A&M.

What A&M is doing is even more ridiculous in that they are targeting non-competitors, i.e. NFL and HS School teams, for litigation.

hawknation2015":1t58s8r4 said:

The Seahawks were perfectly willing to share the 12th Man with A&M and any other football team that elected to use the commonly derived phrase. They were forced to seek a trademark for 12s (no apostrophe) in order to protect their use of the derivation of the phrase from A&M.

What A&M is doing is even more ridiculous in that they are targeting non-competitors, i.e. NFL and HS School, for litigation.

Click to expand...

How can you share something that you don't own the rights to?

So doing a wrong is okay if it's to correct another wrong.

Several colleges are stopping hs teams from using the same logo, are they all wrong as well?

DTexHawk":3ialr10u said:

hawknation2015":3ialr10u said:

The Seahawks were perfectly willing to share the 12th Man with A&M and any other football team that elected to use the commonly derived phrase. They were forced to seek a trademark for 12s (no apostrophe) in order to protect their use of the derivation of the phrase from A&M.

What A&M is doing is even more ridiculous in that they are targeting non-competitors, i.e. NFL and HS School, for litigation.

Click to expand...

So doing a wrong is okay if it's to correct another wrong.

Several colleges are stopping hs teams from using the same logo, are they all wrong as well?

Click to expand...

It's self preservation . . . not "another wrong." You wouldn't fire a shotgun at your neighbor, right? Except, that is, if your neighbor starts firing at you. In the Seahawks' case, they didn't even fire back. They ducked and covered, paid off the assailant, and then bought a new house in another part of town.

Logos are not the same thing as commonly derived phrases. Logos have to be drawn or otherwise created by the artist. To come up with the phrase 6th Man in basketball requires exactly three things: knowledge of the English language, knowledge that there are five starters in basketball, and sufficient human brains cells to complete the thought.

hawknation2015":xqou8ya5 said:

It's self preservation . . . not "another wrong." You wouldn't fire a shotgun at your neighbor, right? Except, that is, if your neighbor starts firing at you. In the Seahawks' case, they didn't even fire back. They ducked and covered and then bought a new house in another part of town.

Logos are not the same thing as commonly derived phrases. Logos have to be drawn or otherwise created by the artist. To come up with the phrase 6th Man in basketball requires exactly three things: knowledge of the English language, knowledge that there are five starters in basketball, and sufficient human brains cells to complete the thought.

Click to expand...

So, they elected to pay a fee originally, then decided against that and are now honoring the trademark. So PA and the Hawks are agreeing that the trademark is a legit way of doing business.

So, is the NFL wrong to not let anyone else use "Super Bowl"?

DTexHawk":1ftk07va said:

hawknation2015":1ftk07va said:

It's self preservation . . . not "another wrong." You wouldn't fire a shotgun at your neighbor, right? Except, that is, if your neighbor starts firing at you. In the Seahawks' case, they didn't even fire back. They ducked and covered and then bought a new house in another part of town.

Logos are not the same thing as commonly derived phrases. Logos have to be drawn or otherwise created by the artist. To come up with the phrase 6th Man in basketball requires exactly three things: knowledge of the English language, knowledge that there are five starters in basketball, and sufficient human brains cells to complete the thought.

Click to expand...

So, they elected to pay a fee originally, then decided against that and are now honoring the trademark. So PA and the Hawks are agreeing that the trademark is a legit way of doing business.

So, is the NFL wrong to not let anyone else use "Super Bowl"?

Click to expand...

"Decided against that," LOL. A&M used the temporary license at a nominal fee of $5,000 per year to legitimize their bitchfest over the 12th Man.

Trademarking the phrase "Super Bowl" is also pretty stupid, though at least it required some creativity and originality.

At the very least, they should limit these trademarks to their level of play, i.e. 12th Man of college football, Super Bowl for professional football, etc. Even then, it is a stretch to think these phrases are deserving of a monopoly on their usage.

I like how the president of the university used the words "Texas A & M' and "intellectual" in the same sentence and apparently never even cracked a smile.

DTexHawk":3ala3h8r said:

hawknation2015":3ala3h8r said:

The Seahawks were perfectly willing to share the 12th Man with A&M and any other football team that elected to use the commonly derived phrase. They were forced to seek a trademark for 12s (no apostrophe) in order to protect their use of the derivation of the phrase from A&M.

What A&M is doing is even more ridiculous in that they are targeting non-competitors, i.e. NFL and HS School, for litigation.

Click to expand...

How can you share something that you don't own the rights to?

So doing a wrong is okay if it's to correct another wrong.

Several colleges are stopping hs teams from using the same logo, are they all wrong as well?

Click to expand...

I think the contempt for Texas A&M comes from the fact that the Seahawks started using the term in the 80's and Texas didn't trademark it until the 90's and several other colleges also lay claim to being the originator of the phrase and could make cases for usage of the term dating back to the early 1900's. At that point the argument could be made that the phrase has no more trademark value as it had become a term of common usage.

Just another example of how the big business of college ball feels compelled to roll over anybody and everything that gets in their way - including a double amputee in Buffalo they suspected was infringing on their "rights". Another proud moment for college football and the ever tolerant state of Texas

DTexHawk":2v22i20z said:

hawknation2015":2v22i20z said:

DTexHawk":2v22i20z said:

chris98251":2v22i20z said:

A & M were not the first to use it, it was around a long time, they were the first to patent it, I think awarding them it was a mistake. They just extort money now from other programs that use the common phrase.

Click to expand...

Do you think it is wrong for the Hawks to have a trademark on "12's"?

Click to expand...

It would be totally unnecessary if not for A&M's incessant bitchfest. The government should not even permit commonly derived phrases, like 12th man in football or 6th man in basketball or three-peat for three repeat championships, to be monopolized by one entity. A&M should not own the phrase 12th Man any more than the dozens of other football teams who have used the phrase since the 11-man-per-team game was invented.

Click to expand...

So you're saying Hawks are wrong also.

Click to expand...

The reason the Hawks had to patent it is because their fans and announcers use it, and if they don't patent it, someone like A&M will, then turn around and sue them for using it.

It's basically self-defense.