Jump to content
Jambands.ca

Phish suing bootleggers


skelter
 Share

Recommended Posts

But we hvae to sell t-shirts to be able to buy tickets off scalpers!

Not sure how I feel about this. Its always left a sour taste in my mouth when I see the Trey-police taking someone's stickers or shirts knowing full well that every dollar the kid makes will go towards getting him to the next Phish show.

That "scene" etc. is part of how Phish got so big, right. At least in my opinion. And they're making mad loot with the music.

That being said, it their copyright to enforce.

At least they haven't gone crazy with stupid ticket prices (cough cough, dead sell-outs cough cough)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not news. Comparing copyright protection to ticket scalping is ridiculous. As far as I know, if you don't take actions to protect your copyright/trademark, you could very well lose it.

And, as always, this would only apply to merch that contains the name Phish or the names of the individual members. Most who sell on the lot are aware of this, and work "around" the copyrights/trademarks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not news. Comparing copyright protection to ticket scalping is ridiculous. As far as I know, if you don't take actions to protect your copyright/trademark, you could very well lose it.

And, as always, this would only apply to merch that contains the name Phish or the names of the individual members. Most who sell on the lot are aware of this, and work "around" the copyrights/trademarks.

Not sure what 1994 has to do with it?

And I don't think that people actually work around it. I think it has to do with "likeness" and therefore any of the shirts that refer to words in a song etc. are in violation and are scooped by the GayTreyPolice, at least on occasion.

I'm sure you're right about use it or loose it, and if in fact, that is what they're doing I'd look at it differently. If the goal is to keep Walmart from selling Phish shirts without licence all the power to them. But if its to combat the kids in the lot, which the link suggests, then it just seems odd.

I wasn't comparing it to scalping - I was merely giving them points for being aligned with my morals on that issue in keeping prices low, but confused on the other....

I'm actually a little nervous about what Hampton is going to look like this weekend. Seems like it could get ugly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Morgan, you're a lawyer. I know this probably isn't your specialty, but you should know that "any of the shirts that refer to words in a song" would NOT be enforceable in an action. In fact, I am almost certain that song titles are fair game too.

They are continuing to go after those that sell items with the band name, or their individual names, or unauthorized photographs/recordings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Morgan, you're a lawyer. I know this probably isn't your specialty, but you should know that "any of the shirts that refer to words in a song" would NOT be enforceable in an action. In fact, I am almost certain that song titles are fair game too.

They are continuing to go after those that sell items with the band name, or their individual names, or unauthorized photographs/recordings.

First I'm not an IP lawyers - so I don't honestly know. I'd suspect its different depending on where you are.

But, regardless of whether it would be "enforceable in an action" I can say that with my own two eyes I've seen them take shirts from people that were Glide vs Tide, Harpua Guinness etc. type shirts. Song names and/or verses with pictures etc.

I've seen that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I doubt that..... Fender and Gibson don't even own the copyrights on their body styles so I doubt that Paul does.

Clearly they aren't enforcing their copyrights in regards to their body shape (given that Walmart stocks Strat ripoffs) although Headstocks are another matter entirely. Pretty sure Gibson just sued Paul Reed Smith and a slew of Korean manufacturers for copyright infringement on the Les Paul. It may be impossible to copyright a guitar body?? I don't know?

Paul's logo/headstock is his trademark:

logo.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand it, Gibson is the only guitar company that has a copyright on their guitar body. I believe it goes by a three-foot rule, whereby there must be discernable differences from three feet away. All the other companies have copyrights on their headstocks.

Back to the Phish debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...