15 replies to this topic

[aTrayne]

Chicago Fire cuts ties with Chicago Fire Juniors, sues them for copyright infringement:

http://chicago.cbslo...-soccer-league/

[onionsack]

Sounds like the youth soccer team deserved to be sued. I am quite sure the team gave them plently of opportuity to comply with their agreement before taking this action.

[Harraby Lad]

more apologist paranoia .... Chicago Fire were more than patient in my opinion.

Also, I don't see a line of people lining up to pay Red Bull $50 per kid in order to use the RBNY trademarks etc .... moot point really as your Austrian experiment wouldn't permit it seeing as it's not really a 'club' as such ....

[MikeV]

Why wouldn't the Fire allow them to use their logo for free? Seems like a good way to raise the profile of the team. In little league when I was on the Athletics was my town league paying MLB or the A's? I honestly have no idea how this works.

[aTrayne]

sack and Harraby, you guys are becoming parodies of yourselves to the point where it's part hilarious and part pathetic. can't you just call a spade a spade? if RedBull had doen something like this to a youth soccer program in Harrison, Kearny, or Florham Park, you'd be calling for Heck and Soler to be strung from a tree and ICBMs to rain down upon Austria. (ok...exaggerating, but you all get my point).

if the agreement was violated by the youth organization, Chicago Fire would definitely be acting appropriately to terminate the contract and issue a cease-and-desist letter. but suing the youth club for monetary damages for every single youth player's use of the brand?!?!? that's both greedy and absurd. and the notion that you can commodify children in such a way by charging a fee for the apparent privilege of wearing a logo is terrible...yes RedBull has plastered their branding all over our youth programs, but they don't charge a fee for the right to be branded.

how the hell can anyone justify this from a PR/community relations perspective? it's legit business practice, but it's terrible common sense.

[onionsack]

sack and Harraby, you guys are becoming parodies of yourselves to the point where it's part hilarious and part pathetic. can't you just call a spade a spade? if RedBull had doen something like this to a youth soccer program in Harrison, Kearny, or Florham Park, you'd be calling for Heck and Soler to be strung from a tree and ICBMs to rain down upon Austria. (ok...exaggerating, but you all get my point).

As an attorney I understand contract law and licensing agreements. There may be more to that story but its sounds like the youth club violated those provisions. I definatley think from a PR perspective it is risky option to take.

If Red Bull did this, i would have the same response. Why did the youth club agree to terms it did not have an intention of honoring? If everything was transparent on its face what the deal was (irrespective if i think the club should make that deal in the first place) then how can we get angry about it?

From a purely PR perspective, I would also have the same response. Risky and probably more harm than good my the move.

if the agreement was violated by the youth organization, Chicago Fire would definitely be acting appropriately to terminate the contract and issue a cease-and-desist letter. but suing the youth club for monetary damages for every single youth player's use of the brand?!?!? that's both greedy and absurd. and the notion that you can commodify children in such a way by charging a fee for the apparent privilege of wearing a logo is terrible...yes RedBull has plastered their branding all over our youth programs, but they don't charge a fee for the right to be branded.

The youth club reached out to the Fire to set up the deal, then failed to honor their agreements. Sounds to me like this organization wnated to be designated an offical affiliate of the Fire to gain some credibility then decided to abandon their duties under the contract.

Frankly, this is why pro sports organizations shouldn't get involved in these type of arrangments. They can support local youth soccer without resorting to brand pimping.

[RedBullsFC]

think of the KIDS!!!!!

[aTrayne]

The youth club reached out to the Fire to set up the deal, then failed to honor their agreements. Sounds to me like this organization wnated to be designated an offical affiliate of the Fire to gain some credibility then decided to abandon their duties under the contract.

I agree, the youth club definitely failed to satisfy their part of the deal.

Frankly, this is why pro sports organizations shouldn't get involved in these type of arrangments. They can support local youth soccer without resorting to brand pimping.

but this is where I think the Fire really took it too far. They didn't even ask the club for a simple blanket licensing fee the club would pay the Fire as part of the branding agreement. Literally, they put a price on the head of every child who would be "allowed" to wear their logo. That's just appalling to me. It goes beyond just brand pimping, it's metaphorically making each child an indentured servant of their brand.

[metros11]

Also, I don't see a line of people lining up to pay Red Bull $50 per kid in order to use the RBNY trademarks etc ....

I don't see it either. But at least one can commend Red Bull on having one of the best youth structures in the United States, especially considering it's free to the players.

[Haig]

Some of our IP attorneys can explain this better, but with trademark law, there's a notion called acquiescence that essentially obliges the holder of an active trademark to defend the trademark. Essentially acquiescence means that if you have an active trademark that is being used by someone else to your knowledge, if you don't act to defend your trademark you have consented to its use by the other party, and lose some of your rights to the trademark.

If the Fire don't actually act to defend their trademark, they will have a harder time making a case for its exclusive use in the future. It may sound cruel, but forcing the youth team to stop using the trademark is something they really have to do.

[Haig]

I don't see it either. But at least one can commend Red Bull on having one of the best youth structures in the United States, especially considering it's free to the players.

Moreover (considering the source), the Philadelphia Union have a particularly crappy youth setup. They basically don't have a real youth team, but instead leave player development up to existing youth clubs, then occasionally bring in other teams' players to wear the ugly blue and baby poop-colored Union shirts to play as the "Union." Kind of like the fake Cosmos, parading other teams' players as its own. Philly's youth scheme is a pretty shameful cop-out.

[Harraby Lad]

The Union allowed local youth set ups to remain independent, at the same time inspiring local youth that it is something special to represent the Union.

Locally, Metrostars / Red Bulls have been burning bridges with tri-state youth soccer since 1996.

[Metro4LIFE]

I agree, the youth club definitely failed to satisfy their part of the deal.



but this is where I think the Fire really took it too far. They didn't even ask the club for a simple blanket licensing fee the club would pay the Fire as part of the branding agreement. Literally, they put a price on the head of every child who would be "allowed" to wear their logo. That's just appalling to me. It goes beyond just brand pimping, it's metaphorically making each child an indentured servant of their brand.

It prob was a better way to "work" with the youth club. THey couldve game them a blanket fee but maybe the youth club couldnt afford it. So they said give us $50 for each kid you get.

[Haig]

The Union allowed local youth set ups to remain independent, at the same time inspiring local youth that it is something special to represent the Union.

You know that's bullshit. Sackoshit is just trying to meet the minimum requirement for a youth system and do it on the cheap.

[Did I Do That?]

You know that's bullshit. Sackoshit is just trying to meet the minimum requirement for a youth system and do it on the cheap.

club-neutral just keeps Philly from having to pony up cash and still get the benefits of homegrown players. It's a joke that Garber allows this to happen.