Surprised it took them so long...

[q]
Dear Mr. Manocchia,

I have recently visited the web site [www.hockey.cornell.edu] and noted the use of the Cornell Athletics Bear logo with the image of a metal screw superimposed over it with the following caption "SCREW CORNELL ATHLETICS". The Cornell Athletics Bear logo and "Cornell Athletics" are trademarked properties of Cornell University. A check with the Athletics Office indicates permission was not sought to use either the logo or the Cornell name. This is a violation of Cornell's policy regarding the use of its name and marks enforceable under The Campus Code of Conduct.

Since this appears to be a site for which you are acting as custodian, you are deemed to be the responsible party. Therefore, be informed that the Cornell Athletics Bear logo, the phrasing "SCREW CORNELL ATHLETICS", and the screw that you have allowed to be posted at this site are to be removed at once. The posting has been done without permission and is considered offensive and disparaging of the Athletics Department and the University in general.

I noted the trademarked logos for the NCAA, ECAC, and The Ivy League are posted at the [elf.hockey.cornell.edu] site. If you have not already sought permission from these organizations to use their marks, I advise you to contact them.

Should you wish to discuss this matter, please contact me.

Robert G. Reese
Director - Product Licensing
University Relations
110 Day Hall
Cornell University
[/q]

Fine if Age can't say it, I will. . .Screw Cornell Athletics and their ugly logo to!

Oh wait. . .is that against the code of conduct???

As an undergrad at Cornell, everyone knew that the University was only marginally interested in your progress. Nobody - unless you were very lucky and had a good advisor - paid much attention to you. It was up to the student to get involved, be pro-active in seeking out activities.

I felt that this changed significantly when one graduates. Suddenly, we are a valuable commodity. Active alums are sought to participate in alumni interviewing, are treated great at reunion, and have great regional Cornell Clubs. I know that the not-so-secret objective of providing these services is fundraising, and many Cornellians give willingly and generously. Perhaps the undergraduate degree is some sort of badge of achievement that we are now proud of. We rememeber the good times, and forget the indifference Cornell showed us a undergrads.

This (more the CollegePass service than the trademark infringement - but I started my rant here) contemptuous treatment of Alumni is something that is out of step with all my other contact with Cornell since graduation.

I think that someone outside the Athletic Department needs to start some damage control. Alumni (at least active ones) tend to look back on their college experience with rose colored glasses. The performance of the Athletic Department subverts that tendency by reminding us of what dealing with Cornell was like when we were undergrads.

It's similar to the fact that parking tickets are typically not given during reunion weekends, for the reason that collecting a measly $5 or $10 from an alum could mean the difference between receiving a couple of grands in donations or diddly squat.

It's a shame that the AD has decided to piss off the alums. I found myself thinking twice the other day when I received a notice to pay for my class dues.

The screw logo was clearly provocative, but it seems to this layman like it might qualify as fair use, since it's obviously an editorial statement rather than an attempt to falsely represent the athletic department.

How about something like...

"Screw BU, The AD Too"

for the logo?

Age Manocchia '98 wrote:

Therefore, be informed that the Cornell Athletics Bear logo, the phrasing "SCREW CORNELL ATHLETICS", and the screw that you have allowed to be posted at this site are to be removed at once.

Wait, so... the screw was trademarked too?

oh my god. the athletic dept is being run by nitpicking morons. why am i surprised? you all have permission to hit me upside the head at my first game.

i like the changes to the artwork in question Age.

i haven't paid my class dues yet or mailed my pledged contribution to cornell - maybe i simply won't now. this is freakin rediculous. god forbid that one have a voice.

stupid, stupid athletic office. i never did like those people.

I hope we've all taken the time to email Noel and the subordinate he's apparently designated to handle unpleasant issues, Anita Brenner, to express our disappointment and irritation at this really stupid and short-sighted decision. [For what it's worth, it took 39 days to get a three-sentence response from Brenner to my email to Noel.]

Unfortunately, I neglected to ask what is probably the operative question: How much would it in fact have cost to provide the Internet broadcasts free? The bottom-line issue is really: Was it worth pissing everyone off (with all consequent ramifications) to avoid that cost (since the party line now appears to be "we expect not to profit from this"? It would also give us an idea if it would have been feasible for some of us to have offset most or all of that cost with donations, thereby sparing us all of this bullshit, had someone been clever enough to ask.

I'm also thinking of a letter to Cornell Magazine. There's a very effective protest from a classmate of mine in the November/December issue regarding the firing of the Arts and Sciences Dean, who apparently learned of his dismissal via an email. Letters-to-the-editor go to cornell_magazine@cornell.edu.

Josh Herman '99 wrote:

Wait, so... the screw was trademarked too?

Probably by the Athletics crowd...

I emailed the Athletics Dept, too, though of course I haven't gotten any sort of response.

Al wrote:
[Q]
I'm also thinking of a letter to Cornell Magazine. There's a very effective protest from a classmate of mine in the November/December issue regarding the firing of the Arts and Sciences Dean, who apparently learned of his dismissal via an email. Letters-to-the-editor go to cornell_magazine@cornell.edu.
[/Q]

Maybe we should combine forces? Someone write a letter to the AD and Cornell Magazine, with as many signatures as we can gather?

The part of me that was trained by being a Cornell undergrad thinks it's all useless anyway, but I'm pissed enough to try . . .

Do I need to contact someone before I am allowed to wear my Cornell jersey? I guess I will have to forgo making any signs saying "Go Cornell." Perhaps "Go C0rnell" is a non infringing alternative (or "Go C-rnell".

Neil Shapiro '83 wrote:

This (more the CollegePass service than the trademark infringement - but I started my rant here) contemptuous treatment of Alumni is something that is out of step with all my other contact with Cornell since graduation.

Interesting observation, Neil.

One wonders if we may be barking up the wrong tree. Perhaps we should introduce Cornell's VP for Alumni Affairs and Development, Inge Reichenbach, to this happy situation. ["Contemptuous" is a superb choice of word, by the way.] I suspect Inge has a rather broader view of the alumni world than the moles in Athletics, who can't seem to see beyond their little spreadsheets.

Very nice new graphic, Age.... Very nice....


-John

It was the stupidest looking bear I could find in a pinch.

As for Al's question, as I have told them, it would have cost them nothing (at least this year) as I could have handled all the broadcasting duties for all the sports myself quite trivially. But since couldn't be bothered to consult me, despite what he/she/it has gone around saying...

And don't you people get any dirty thoughts but I'm thinking that maybe the screw is to symbolize their right to screw people...over.

Shh.. nobody is supposed to know that.


"It's similar to the fact that parking tickets are typically not given during reunion weekends, for the reason that collecting a measly $5 or $10 from an alum could mean the difference between receiving a couple of grands in donations or diddly squat."

I think it would be funny if you used Cornell's old atheletics logo. I wonder if a trademark still applies to something they dont use anymore.

The University owns the old logo, not athletics (that's why they made the new one).

[Q]Maybe we should combine forces? Someone write a letter to the AD and Cornell Magazine, with as many signatures as we can gather?[/Q]
I'm in on that one. It'd probably be ignored, but if it got sent around (Cornell Magazine, Alumni Affairs, AD, athletics, etc - I'd say Hunter, but he's pretty much a lame duck right now, though the new pres, when they decide on one, might be good) maybe SOMEBODY'LL care enough abut this f*cked up situation to lend an ear.

Anyway, I'm in, though I hardly have the time to compose the letter.

-Fred

Not to mention that the symbolism would be less appropriate. The problems have been with recent decisions, coincidentally since the introduction of the Huggy Bear logo.

Ya know what we did to Voloninno? Yeah.....

Oh, and "if they wish to discuss this matter, please contact me."

Well, I have to admit that I'm tempted to draft the letter to Cornell Magazine myself. I've been known to string a few good words together from time to time. (Sadly, the most easily available example is [newyork.craigslist.org] ...) Goodness knows that Inge would be surprised to see my name at the bottom after I worked for her for five years. I'm not really sure I have the time, but it's still tempting.

As for contacting Inge directly to make her aware of what's going on - I would also include John Webster, Laura Toy, and Maya Gasuk.

Beeeej

Jeffrey "Beeeej" Anbinder '94 wrote:

I've been known to string a <a href="newyork.craigslist.org/nyc/m4w/6546545.html">few good words</a> together from time to time.

I should say!

Age: you should put a teddy bear in the screw the AD logo to resemble the huggy bear

Its incredible that someone in Athletics is concerned about the logo and not about the reason that the Icers' biggest fans are pissed off. CU loses even more goodwill and gains... nothing.

In any case, I won't see the letter in Cornell Magazine. Like I said before, I decided to cancel all my donations - which includes my class dues and the subscription.

First of all, one of the reasons institutions employ people to send out letters like that is because the courts have long interpreted a lack of effort to enforce intellectual property ownership as a sign that you're not interested in retaining it. In fact in lawsuits over trademark infringement, the owner can't just show that someone else used their mark - the owner usually has to provide evidence that they actively tried to enforce their ownership. You don't have to like that Age got this letter, or the timing of it, but there's a sound reason that someone spends their time on that stuff.

Second, it's up to you what you do with your money, but - other than the portion that pays for your magazine subscription (which doesn't profit Cornell) - your class dues are for use by your class for class activities, not for Cornell's use. It's always wise to think about who you're actually affecting when you attempt to vote with your wallet.

Beeeej

You think Robert G. Reese frequents eLF? Obviously someone took the time to alert him to it.

Tom Tone wrote:

Shh.. nobody is supposed to know that.

Oh, please... you tell that stuff to everybody.

I can and will blame Cornell. Because I believe Age's picture is, as was mentioned before, an editorial statement. Thus what they are doing is trying to stop Age from a perfectly legal venture by threats. (A pretty common tactic in the new millenium - I believe in "Loser pays" laws when it comes to stuff like this, but I digress).

Would we have seen the same threat had there been no screw? No. In fact, there's the old unofficial Cornell hockey site with a copyrighted Cornell bear logo. No problems there...

And my class dues, as far as I know, mostly go into a Cornell scholarship with the class's name on it. Thus its pretty much the same as giving to the school directly. Also, in my Cornell Magazine renewal, I didn't see a box marked "Order magazine only, do not give the donation", so that went away.

A little off the subject, but in looking at the cornellbigred.com site, I couldn't help but notice the "Listen to the game!" links all over any area where the hockey team's schedule is posted. I don't think those audio links were so rampant last year when it was free...

What you believe about Age's picture doesn't matter very much. Trademark holders need to enforce their mark on every apparently unauthorized use of it, or they lose their mark. If Age mounts a reasonable defense under "fair use," they can back down, or they can take him to court and risk losing.

As for "loser pays" laws, most of them are really designed to protect corporations from frivolous lawsuits, not individuals like Age. Next time you lose your eyesight because of a defective product but for whatever reason the manufacturer wins the lawsuit, come back and tell me how you feel about "loser pays" laws.

And lastly, Cornell also does not benefit from scholarship endowments. Students who otherwise wouldn't be able to afford college benefit from scholarship endowments.

Beeeej

Then why did Cornell not enforce its trademark on the old (non-screw) bear. No, they let that one slide. So much for enforcing every unauthorized use of the bear...

Unless, of course, Keith's old page had permission from Cornell to use that bear. I'm assuming he didn't.

I'm with Beeeej here. Cornell was correct to send Age the letter given that they must enforce their trademarks or lose them. Cornell cannot pick and choose when to enforce their trademarks; they must do it each and every time. You can whine that isn't fair but tough cookies, that is the way the system works.

HOWEVER, it seems to me (and IANAL) that Age is justified in using the modified image given that there is a parody exemption in the case law surrounding trademark. My understanding is that to be exempt, the parody must "convey two simultaneous and contradictory messages". Moreover, the parody must diminish the risk of consumer confusion "by conveying [only] just enough of the original design to allow the consumer to appreciate the point of parody. (http://www.chillingeffects.org/protest/faq.cgi#QID88)

Then again, satire is *not* protected so what the hell do I know...
(http://legalminds.lp.findlaw.com/list/cni-copyright/msg03098.html)

It is also my understanding that "first amendment considerations are much stronger in the non-commercial context, in which the parodist is attempting to express an idea, than in the commercial context, in which the parodist uses the parody of the mark in association with his own goods or services."
(http://www.usip.com/articles/parodytm.htm)

Of course, this is all moot when we consider this is a battle best waged in press rather than in a courtroom. I suspect the senior Cornell administration would rein in Athletics pretty quickly before letting this degenerate into a PR debacle. But just to be safe, maybe Age should contact the EFF.

(See Age, all that surfing and reading on IP when I was supposed to be working on my thesis wasn't pointless after all )

[www.eff.org]

Age,

Through this site, you provide a tremendous service to Alumni. I think the appropriate question is really "Why isn't this site given permission to use Cornell trademarks?"

I would appreciate it if Age could take a minute to explain his relationship with Athletics and the University. I know that they let you run those feeds, so in some way they are sanctioning elynah.

If Athletics were the least bit pro-active, they could have found someone connected with the university - not necessarily Age - who would have been happy to provide the audio on the web, maybe as part of a research project or knowing Cornell, for Gym credit.


And didn't Cornell try something like a Cornell Sports Network a few years ago? I was really proud of athletics striking out and trying to get the sporting events aired to as many alumni as possible. Things sure have changed.

Yeah. Why don’t they just say;

"Hey you there!!! Come over here! OK, good. Now spread your legs while I put my steal-toed boots on."



"No. No... I promise you will enjoy the experience unequivocally."

The old bear logo is owned by the university and every time athletics needed to use it for something, they had to get permission from the university. They got tired of the red tape and decided to have their own logo made, which they could use to their hearts' content. I certainly don't blame them for having their own logo made. The situation was pretty ridiculous. The design is somewhat regrettable, however.

I have some experience with the logo business. I had to get permission to use the university logo on the FSAE racing team t-shirts when I was on the team. If I wanted to use the actual logo, I could probably jump through the hoops and fill out the forms and get permission to, but frankly I'm not in the slightest way affiliated with athletics, they've never given me a damn thing, and they can rot in hell for all I care, so I wouldn't want to be linked to them in any way, even if it was just a logo.

As for the LynahCam, they had an opportunity to help out, but wouldn't lift a finger. All I get is the video feed from the team camera (which I'm sure coach is glad I had, for the aforementioned tape incident). The hardware is all mine, the software is mine, and the servers reside at my places of employment on campus (with full knowledge of my employers, despite the unfounded slander propagated by on that account). As I said, I even had to run my own ethernet wire to the press box, which I share with whomever needs it (including Adam this year). So really, I get jack from athletics.

They're required to attempt to enforce their trademark in every instance in which they know about the potential infringement. I'm sure you must be able to comprehend that a trademark holder can't be expected to enforce ownership of a mark when they don't know it's being used. (As Age has theorized, someone in Athletics has only very recently been kind enough to notify University Relations, and UR almost certainly wasn't aware of eLF before that.)

Which brings an interesting question to my mind. If Cornell University is the trademark owner of record, but Athletics consciously let it slide as long as eLF bore the proper image (and they would have had to; Laura has been reading eLF for several years) and only notified the larger entity known as Cornell when they felt the image had been used rudely, did Athletics - acting as Cornell's agent - fail to enforce vigorously?

I suspect the answer in a court of law would be "no," but it's an argument I'd enjoy trying to make. Shame I'm not a member of the Bar yet.

Beeeej

P.S. Age, any reason you wouldn't want to ask UR for legit permission to use the old logo on eLF? We all preferred it, anyway.

Heh. That's actually a good idea. However, I didn't have any of the logos before the satire one.

OK, now THAT is a funny image.

I'd kind a like to see one with [www.sonypictures.com] (from Sony Pictures -- CYA).

>And my class dues, as far as I know, mostly go into a Cornell scholarship >with the class's name on it. Thus its pretty much the same as giving to >the school directly.

Your class dues go to your class fund, which is controlled by class officers from your class, hence the name. And, if they were for a scholarship, then it would be giving to a current or prospective student, which is not giving to Cornell. I don't think Athletics gives a damn if you are withholding money for your class, I just hope you are not in the same class as me..

>Also, in my Cornell Magazine renewal, I didn't see a box marked "Order >magazine only, do not give the donation", so that went away.

Actually, you can order the magazine only. I almost did it by accident when I paid my dues. The dues are only $5 more than the subscription or something, so it doesn't really pay to get the magazine only.

Well sure it pays. $5 is 71% to my monthly Bend Over And Take It Webcast fee.

Adam '01 wrote:

[Q]Ya know what we did to Voloninno? Yeah.....[/Q]

Yeah, I remember what we did to Volonnino! But I'm not sure this warrants that exact kind of treatment. While pissing them off would be nice, I'd be much happier to actually get the old screw logo back, or, better yet, get them to ditch the whole CornellPass thing all together.

Note in the article linked that the issue is not completely different. Satire and noncommercial use have been used as criteria to allow use of trademarked items. An email based group called the Stella awards used this topic as the basis of its current posting. For more information see:

[www.stellaawards.com]

Note the following sentence:

[Q]The court held that "Barbie Girl" fell under the noncommercial-use exception. [/Q]

from

[www.law.com]