What's new
By:

Dick Bavetta

Eenie-Meenie said:
You're probably right, but even if he says he missed the call, it will be interesting to see exactly what he says, because if his answer is not carefully written, it might unconsciously drop something incriminating.
Click to expand...

How long do you anticipate you might have to wait for a response? And what if you get no response or even any acknowledgement that he received your inquiry?

How much do you think you'll continue to pursue this?
 
Eenie-Meenie said:
Yes, I agree. But he's not 20-something anymore. He should be a bit more magnanimous. Sure, you got guys like Rodman, but Jordan's success has gone to his head. He thinks he's God now.
Click to expand...

he's donating it all to Chicago area charities that focus on children's welfare and impoverished neighborhoods - I'm not sure how much more magnanimous he can get.

I mean, yes, he's extremely wealthy and probably should not have made an issue out of this, I agree.

at any rate, the company is bankrupt - and while I have no idea how this sort of thing works - I'm not sure he'll ever see any of the money in the award
 
moevillini said:
he's donating it all to Chicago area charities that focus on children's welfare and impoverished neighborhoods - I'm not sure how much more magnanimous he can get.

I mean, yes, he's extremely wealthy and probably should not have made an issue out of this, I agree.

at any rate, the company is bankrupt - and while I have no idea how this sort of thing works - I'm not sure he'll ever see any of the money in the award
Click to expand...

Saveway bought out the company and will assume the debt, I'm sure. And I don't plan to pursue the push-off matter any further than simply to write one letter. Just curious. Like I said, I'm an historian. Truth often comes out many years later. But I don't admire Jordan for doing this -- his name is worth millions, give me a break.
 
A little lesson on trademarks.

If you don't enforce your trademark you lose it. You know a grocery store is using your likeness in an ad and don't do anything about it and you lose your billion dollar trademark rights to your own image. Next thing you know Microsoft is using Jordan's image without his permission and there's nothing he can do about it.

EM is a huge dumbass.

Yeah EM when Dal asks if you're real it's because you're curious and he's never seen a curious person before. Holy **** how clueless can you be?
 
Gameface said:
A little lesson on trademarks.

If you don't enforce your trademark you lose it. You know a grocery store is using your likeness in an ad and don't do anything about it and you lose your billion dollar trademark rights to your own image. Next thing you know Microsoft is using Jordan's image without his permission and there's nothing he can do about it.

EM is a huge dumbass.

Yeah EM when Dal asks if you're real it's because you're curious and he's never seen a curious person before. Holy **** how clueless can you be?
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, his comment was sarcastic, so how am I supposed to respond? Ok, so his name is his trademark. I guess in this litigious, capitalist system you can justify it. But that's the problem with our society. It's so litigious and so self-centered. You really think Microsoft or any company is going to start using his name to sell their products? What they did was improper, agreed. But even one judge said he was making a mountain out of a molehill. I still say it was an ******* move.
 
Eenie-Meenie said:
Yeah, well, his comment was sarcastic, so how am I supposed to respond? Ok, so his name is his trademark. I guess in this litigious, capitalist system you can justify it. But that's the problem with our society. It's so litigious and so self-centered. You really think Microsoft or any company is going to start using his name to sell their products? What they did was improper, agreed. But even one judge said he was making a mountain out of a molehill. I still say it was an ******* move.
Click to expand...

Good for you.

How would it be to see the world through the eyes of a 6 year old?
 
Gameface said:
A little lesson on trademarks.

If you don't enforce your trademark you lose it. You know a grocery store is using your likeness in an ad and don't do anything about it and you lose your billion dollar trademark rights to your own image. Next thing you know Microsoft is using Jordan's image without his permission and there's nothing he can do about it.

EM is a huge dumbass.

Yeah EM when Dal asks if you're real it's because you're curious and he's never seen a curious person before. Holy **** how clueless can you be?
Click to expand...

After reviewing this page, I'm surprised Jordan won his case:

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/enforcing-trademark-rights-29902.html
 
See this from that page about being awarded damages from someone using your trademark:

How to Stop Others From Using a Trademark

Typically, you begin by sending a letter, called a "cease and desist letter," to the wrongful ("infringing") user, demanding that it stop using the mark.

If the wrongful user continues to infringe the mark, you can file a lawsuit to stop the improper use. The lawsuit is usually filed in federal court if the mark is used in more than one state or country, and in state court if the dispute is between purely local marks.

In addition to preventing further use of the mark, you can sometimes obtain money damages from the wrongful user.
Damages for Trademark Infringement

If you can prove in federal court that the infringing use is likely to confuse consumers and that the business has suffered economically as a result of the infringement, the infringer may have to pay you money damages based on the loss.

If the court finds that the infringer intentionally copied your trademark, or at least should have known about the existing trademark, the infringer may have to give up the profits it made by using the mark as well as pay other damages, such as punitive damages, fines, or attorney fees.

On the other hand, if your business has not been damaged, a court has discretion to allow the other company to continue to use the trademark under limited circumstances that are designed to avoid consumer confusion.
Click to expand...
 
Eenie-Meenie said:
Anyone who says it wasn't a blatant push off is definitely in denial.
Click to expand...
Lol. You're delusional. That's the very definition of incidental contact. Russell's own momentum took him backwards, not the hand of MJ. Denial is what I was in when it happened, and I thought we got screwed on the call. We didn't. Incidental contact. The end. If that play had happened at any other time in the game, nobody would even remember it. The only reason anybody still complains about it, is because of their emotion at the time clouding their judgment, thus preventing them from having an objective opinion. Like I said, gripe about the Eisley and Harper calls that legitimately screwed us, and forget about what would have been a ticky tack foul to end the game.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
Lol. You're delusional. That's the very definition of incidental contact. Russell's own momentum took him backwards, not the hand of MJ. Denial is what I was in when it happened, and I thought we got screwed on the call. We didn't. Incidental contact. The end. If that play had happened at any other time in the game, nobody would even remember it. The only reason anybody still complains about it, is because of their emotion at the time clouding their judgment, thus preventing them from having an objective opinion. Like I said, gripe about the Eisley and Harper calls that legitimately screwed us, and forget about what would have been a ticky tack foul to end the game.
Click to expand...

Watch the bleepin video in slow-mo. Jordan follows through with a push to the side of Russell's hip and you see Russell moved directly in line with the motion of Jordan's hand / arm.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
Lol. You're delusional. That's the very definition of incidental contact. Russell's own momentum took him backwards, not the hand of MJ. Denial is what I was in when it happened, and I thought we got screwed on the call. We didn't. Incidental contact. The end. If that play had happened at any other time in the game, nobody would even remember it. The only reason anybody still complains about it, is because of their emotion at the time clouding their judgment, thus preventing them from having an objective opinion. Like I said, gripe about the Eisley and Harper calls that legitimately screwed us, and forget about what would have been a ticky tack foul to end the game.
Click to expand...

Simce when is using your hands on offense to get open incidental contact. Yeah, they let guys do it, a lot, like Iverson who used to do it with his forearm. But it's a foul and should be called because it's anything but incidental -- IT'S INTENTIONAL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top