# NFL Trademark article...



## kimura-mma (Jul 26, 2008)

Interesting article today about the ownership and usage of the New Orleans Saints "Who Dat?" slogan.

Goes to show how much gray area these situations have. Even when it seems unclear who actually has ownership, cease & desist orders are still being issued.


----------



## party animal (Aug 30, 2009)

Yes this is going to hurt my sales


----------



## allhamps (Mar 15, 2007)

I was listning to that on the news in the truck the other day. Quite honestly, I would say that MY kids had ownership of "who dat?", as many times as I have had to correct their grammer. But seriously, this is a problem with the lack of clarity on this issue.


----------



## party animal (Aug 30, 2009)

From what I can tell it is not copyright infringement unless you clearly relate it to the saints (put the word saints, nfl, superbowl, ect.)


----------



## kimura-mma (Jul 26, 2008)

party animal said:


> From what I can tell it is not copyright infringement unless you clearly relate it to the saints (put the word saints, nfl, superbowl, ect.)


Copyright infringement is not the issue, it's trademark infringement. And if "Who Dat?" is trademarked, it won't matter if it's related to the Saints. Any of usage of "Who Dat?" on a shirt will violate that trademark.


----------



## allhamps (Mar 15, 2007)

So how does that affect rap star Young Jeezy who has had a song AND a t-shirt out long before the Saints started using the term "who dat"?


----------



## wayoflifestore (Jul 12, 2009)

The Saints fans have been using "Who Dat" since the 1980s and "Who Dat" has been around in Louisiana culture for over 130 years, including local high schools in the New Orleans area that use the chant. Young Jeezy was not the first person to use this saying.


----------



## kimura-mma (Jul 26, 2008)

allhamps said:


> So how does that affect rap star Young Jeezy who has had a song AND a t-shirt out long before the Saints started using the term "who dat"?


If anything, he infringed on the trademark by using it. If he wants, he can get into the mix if he believes he has some ownership to it. But since the NFL, the Saints and the city of New Orleans has been using it much longer, I doubt he'll have much of a chance.


----------



## selzler (Apr 4, 2007)

What I saw on the news they had the nfl logo with lettering on some and new orleans logo on the shirt. I don't believe using the lettering will get you in trouble just keep the other logo off the shirt.


----------



## kimura-mma (Jul 26, 2008)

selzler said:


> I don't believe using the lettering will get you in trouble just keep the other logo off the shirt.


If someone owns, or even claims to own, the trademark rights to "Who Dat?" then you get sued for using it. Even if it's just the words and nothing else.


----------



## Solcial (Jan 12, 2010)

Personnaly I dont see how someone can trademark such a common slang term, it would be equivalent to trademarking "bling-bling" its common urban parlance, it shouldnt be trademarkable.


----------



## kimura-mma (Jul 26, 2008)

Solcial said:


> Personnaly I dont see how someone can trademark such a common slang term, it would be equivalent to trademarking "bling-bling" its common urban parlance, it shouldnt be trademarkable.


I agree regarding common terms, and the USPTO is actually pretty strict when it comes to registering phrases, slogans, etc for use on t-shirts.

But in this case, "Who Dat?" is not a common term, since it has been LONG associated with the Saints and city of New Orleans.

When common terms are justifiably associated with a brand (ie "Just Do It"), it should be allowed to be trademarked. And I would argue that "Who Dat?" falls into that category.

Oh and "Bling Bling" and has been registered a few times too.


----------



## allhamps (Mar 15, 2007)

Tim, no disrespect to New Orleans, but "who dat" IS a common urban slang/dialect/simple plain bad grammar. I was born in 1959, and it was one of my parent's pet peeves, when we said "who dat", instead of "who is that". I can see the fact of using the phrase with NFL and/or Saints emblems/logos, etc. being an issue, but no one in their right minds is going to be able to tell a person you can't put a common everyday word on a shirt because they "own" it. What next, you get fined for SAYING "who dat"?


----------



## kimura-mma (Jul 26, 2008)

allhamps said:


> Tim, no disrespect to New Orleans, but "who dat" IS a common urban slang/dialect/simple plain bad grammar. I was born in 1959, and it was one of my parent's pet peeves, when we said "who dat", instead of "who is that".


Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest it wasn't a common slang. I'm just pointing out that when a slogan or phrase is justifiably associated with a brand, it becomes trademarkable regardless of how common it may be. This isn't just my opinion, but it's how the USPTO operates. There's really no sense in arguing it, because it's not up for debate... if the USPTO allows registration, than it can be trademarked.



allhamps said:


> I can see the fact of using the phrase with NFL and/or Saints emblems/logos, etc. being an issue, but no one in their right minds is going to be able to tell a person you can't put a common everyday word on a shirt because they "own" it.


If someone is awarded a federal registration on "Who Dat?" then they will, in their right mind, tell someone they cannot use it. That is the whole point of federal registration... to own something exclusively for the classification applied for.

Again, this is hardly up for debate since the NFL and WhoDat Inc are already sending cease and desist letters. And again, the USPTO ultimately determines what is or isn't trademarkable, regardless of what we think.



allhamps said:


> What next, you get fined for SAYING "who dat"?


No, you cannot own a registration on verbal words. But you can own a registration for use on t-shirts.


----------

