[OnTheWayUp]

I just wanted everyone to review the logo that will be on the website and t-shirts.

Thanks

Nflpink - A Woman’s World to Football

[crose23]

I like it a lot!

[OnTheWayUp]

Thanks crose!

[ADVERTISE HERE!]

I really like it, but I'm very concerned about the trademark issues you might soon face by using NFL in your name.

[OnTheWayUp]

Thanks JMenq, I have been doing research and from what I have read, the only way I would get into trouble is if they had something associated with NFL Pink. For example, if I was to purchase nflnetwork.com, that would be copyright infringement. Anyone is free to use NFL in there website name, as long as the NFL Logo isn't anywhere on the site.

If I am wrong, please someone tell me, but I have done ample research on this topic.

[ADVERTISE HERE!]

I would consult an attorney before relying on your own research. The standard for trademark infringement isn't whether a trademark owner has an association with the proposed business or its trademark. Rather, it's whether a rational consumer would be confused as to the source of the product. Because a rational consumer might think that NFL Pink is some product of the NFL (especially considering that the NFL owns all other trademarks which include the use of NFL - see Record List Display), I think you're just asking for trouble by using their trademarked "NFL" in your name.

What are your thoughts?

(By the way, this is just my opinion, not legal advice, and could be WAY off base.)

[OnTheWayUp]

Originally Posted by jmenq2

I would consult an attorney before relying on your own research. The standard for trademark infringement isn't whether a trademark owner has an association with the proposed business or its trademark. Rather, it's whether a rational consumer would be confused as to the source of the product. Because a rational consumer might think that NFL Pink is some product of the NFL (especially considering that the NFL owns all other trademarks which include the use of NFL - see Record List Display), I think you're just asking for trouble by using their trademarked "NFL" in your name.

(By the way, this is just my opinion, not legal advice, and could be WAY off base.)

Thanks JMenq I will definetly look into it.

[OnTheWayUp]

With that being said i dont know why http://www.nfl-fanz.com,www.thenflfo...om,nflfans.com, nflfansforum.com, nflsidelines.com, and the list goes on and on...and this is all they put in the disclaimer:


DISCLAIMER:

NFL Sidelines and its members are NOT affiliated with the NFL, NFL Properties, or an NFL team. Any information on this site is not endorsed by, or do they in any way reflect, the opinions and/or positions of the NFL and are the property of the site it originates from or the original creator. NFL Enterprises, L.P. NFL and the NFL shield design are registered trademarks of the National Football League. Team names, logos and uniform designs are registered trademarks of the teams indicated. This site is for informational and entertainment purposes only.

NFL Sidelines is a NFL Fans site which publishes rumors as well as accurately reported facts. Information on this site may be fact or fiction and NFL Sidelines makes no warranty as to the validity of any claims.

NOTE: All images that appear on the site are copyright their respective owners and NFL Sidelines claims no credit for them unless otherwise noted.

If you own the rights to any of the images and do not wish them to appear on the site please contact us, listing which images and their location on the site, and they will be promptly removed. Thank you.

[ADVERTISE HERE!]

Doesn't really answer the question, but should tell you to consult an attorney before spending any more time, money, or effort on this:

Any person who shall affix, apply, or annex, or use in connection with any goods or services, or any container or containers for goods, a false designation of origin, or any false description or representation, ... and shall cause such goods or services to enter into commerce, ... shall be liable to a civil action ... by any person who believes that he is or is likely to be damaged by the use of any such false description or representation. Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. s 1125(a)

In assessing the likelihood of confusion to the public, the standard used by the courts is the typical buyer exercising ordinary care. AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341, 353 (9th Cir. 1979)

There is a symmetry between the concepts of secondary meaning and likelihood of confusion. Secondary meaning requires an examination of the non-infringing party's mark and product, and tests the connection in the buyers' mind between the product bearing the mark and its source. Likelihood of confusion in a sponsorship context focuses on the product bearing the allegedly infringing marks and asks whether the public believes the product bearing the marks originates with or is somehow endorsed or authorized by the plaintiff. See Kentucky Fried Chicken Corp. v. Diversified Packaging Corp., 549 F.2d 368, 388-90 (5th Cir. 1977);

[ADVERTISE HERE!]

Without question, consult an attorney.

Even if a simple disclaimer is all that is needed, he/she will be able to draft it for you appropriately.

[OnTheWayUp]

Originally Posted by jmenq2

Without question, consult an attorney.

Even if a simple disclaimer is all that is needed, he/she will be able to draft it for you appropriately.

Thanks JMenq!