LeBron James' Dispute With Alabama Far From a Slam Dunk
IP lawyers say his copyright and trademark claims over barbershop talk videos aren't championship caliber.
April 02, 2018 at 06:56 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
LeBron James has done a lot of winning in his career. But any trademark or copyright infringement litigation he may be contemplating against the University of Alabama isn't likely to be part of it.
That's the reaction of experienced IP attorneys to a threatening letter James' multimedia platform sent to the university over its “Shop Talk” video of players talking football with coach Nick Saban in a barbershop setting.
James has published two similar black-and-white videos talking basketball and life with National Basketball Association stars in a barbershop. Called “The Shop,” James' videos are published on his “Uninterrupted” multimedia platform.
“'Shop Talk' is clearly using the ideas, concepts and format previously created and exploited by Uninterrupted in connection with its program titled 'The Shop,'” states the letter from Joshua Tarnow, a lawyer for James' Uninterrupted multimedia platform, as quoted by ESPN. Tarnow requests a conversation with the university before “rushing into legal proceedings.”
Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass' Lawrence Siskind and Owen, Wickersham & Erickson's Lawrence Townsend suggested that going to court would probably end in a haircut.
“I would say he has no claim under copyright law and a very, very weak claim under trademark law,” said Siskind.
“Don't mess with LeBron,” said Townsend, but “he might be in a little over his head here.”
In the first place, ideas and concepts aren't protectable under copyright law, and format rarely is. “The people who wrote the letter are giving away the claim by using that phraseology,” Siskind said.
And the concept of men discussing sports in a barbershop is far from original. “There's a bar. There's a barbershop. That's where guys hang out and talk sports,” said Townsend.
The trademark claim perhaps can't be rejected out of hand, given that both programs use “shop” in their titles. But proving infringement would be a serious uphill battle.
Siskind said a search of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's database revealed more than 12,000 registrations and applications that use the word “shop.” James would have to prove that “shop” has acquired secondary meaning such that the public associates it with James' videos.
Plus, said Townsend, the videos involve speech that would be protected by the First Amendment. Under the law of many circuits, James would have to prove that Alabama's videos were explicitly misleading.
News coverage indicates that James did not formally send a cease-and-desist letter, but rather requested a copy of the full Alabama video and “a conversation about how to address Uninterrupted's concerns amicably.”
Siskind said that's not surprising. “When you have a strong claim, you send a cease-and-desist letter. When you have a weak claim, you request a conversation,” he quipped.
Both lawyers said the best James might hope for is that Alabama change the title of its video. Siskind noted that the university also uses the mark “Bama Cuts” in its video.
If James can persuade Alabama not to use the “Shop Talk” title, said Townsend, “that might be enough to consider it a win for LeBron's side.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPaul Weiss’ Shanmugam Joins 11th Circuit Fight Over False Claims Act’s Constitutionality
‘A Force of Nature’: Littler Mendelson Shareholder Michael Lotito Dies At 76
3 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Arnold & Porter Matches Market Year-End Bonus, Requires Billable Threshold for Special Bonuses
- 2Advising 'Capital-Intensive Spaces' Fuels Corporate Practice Growth For Haynes and Boone
- 3Big Law’s Year—as Told in Commentaries
- 4Pa. Hospital Agrees to $16M Settlement Following High Schooler's Improper Discharge
- 5Connecticut Movers: Year-End Promotions, Hires and an Office Opening
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250