skelter Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 http://jam.canoe.ca/Music/2009/03/04/8626751-ap.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoMack Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 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 More sharing options...
Basher Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 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 More sharing options...
Freak By Night Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 This could be trouble for the "Gay for Trey" t-shirt people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basher Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Wrong - "Trey" isn't a copyright or trademark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freak By Night Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 *whew*! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basher Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 From AP:"Phish says the company authorized to sell its merchandise first obtained orders authorizing the seizure of bootleg goods sold during a tour in 1994". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Wish Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Yeah you always had to be careful selling goods with anything copyrighted....Especially when you got closer to the venue. We used the Phish logo on one of our stickers in 1999 and had to keep an eye out for "6-Up!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoMack Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 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 More sharing options...
Basher Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 1994 has to do with me saying this is not news. Nothing new here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybone Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 I wonder if the Languadoc image on the Gay For Trey shirt is copyrighted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basher Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 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 More sharing options...
MoMack Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 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 More sharing options...
Basher Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Verses from songs is something else.Now, they could have been enforcing illegal vending in the instances you mentioned, but they were certainly not enforcing copyright/trademark infringement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Wish Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 That is because although those images are not Phish copyrighted images, they are still copyrighted by some company.....Song names, lyrics, band members names etc are all ok. Anything with a corporate logo, a cartoon character, the Phish logo etc are all out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basher Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Right Sean, and like I said, this is nothing new from the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YearsAlongTheSea Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayr Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 I wonder if the Languadoc image on the Gay For Trey shirt is copyrighted.For sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Wish Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Actually I doubt that..... Fender and Gibson don't even own the copyrights on their body styles so I doubt that Paul does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basher Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 I'm pretty sure jayr was joking. Rephrase, god I hope jayr was joking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooly Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Actually I doubt that..... Fender and Gibson don't even own the copyrights on their body styles so I doubt that Paul does.well if thats the case, if anyone was planning on building a Tele, ive got the original Fender template if you ever need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayr Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 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: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Posted March 5, 2009 Report Share Posted March 5, 2009 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 More sharing options...
Hartamophone Posted March 5, 2009 Report Share Posted March 5, 2009 I wonder if this is as much about them trying to keep a lid on the scene as it is protecting their copyright. If they are trying to make sure the atmosphere surrounding their shows does not get out of control, limiting vending might be one way to go about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaggyBalls Posted March 5, 2009 Report Share Posted March 5, 2009 I think they're just trying to make sure their fans stay smart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now