Back to home

Cause of Rant


from Holt, Doug
*(Now too late to comment. Doug says his item appeared in the Chicago Tribune Monday October 6)*
Oct. 1, 2003
Hi all,
I'm a reporter working on a story about a former Nike Missile site. The village of Vernon Hills, Illinois, is currently developing its former Nike site into a large sports complex, with baseball, football and soccer fields, tennis courts and playgrounds.

The village wants to name it the "Nike Sports Complex" to honor its Cold War heritage. The big shoe company, Nike Inc., however, says that the idea raises serious trade mark issues. The company is clearly not thrilled with the idea.

I'm looking for anyone who used to work at a Nike missile defense site who might care to comment.

I'm on a short deadline, so call as soon as possible.

Many thanks.

Doug Holt
Chicago Tribune
(847) 918-2807

Rant starts here

Looks like the Nike Overpriced Shoe Company, whose products are made in Cheeep China, wants to trade mark the name of an ancient Greek Goddess of Victory and a Cold War American missile system. So - the high-priced cheeep shoe company is trying to co-opt/adopt/exploit/trademark the ancient honorable name Nike - ya gotta be kidding. The Nike company started about the same time as most Nike missile bases were being decommissioned in the United States.

For a background in this silliness, look at the battle over the rights to use the phrase "USA 2003". [ casche copy here ] The battle is between Nike and the "Federation Internationale de Football Association". The Frogies are claiming that the combination of "USA" and "2003" is theirs. The human race does not have enough troubles - it has to make some up. And the attorneys on both sides win.

The athletes of ancient Greece paid homage to Nike, and now the overpriced shoe company wants to commercialize the name as theirs. Well, nice try - and why not? Looks like the sky (or above) is the limit?

I guess that is why the Nike Overpriced Shoe Company gets the high priced lawyers that each bill for one day ($1000) what a Chinese factory worker gets in a year (they make about $0.40/hour $1000/year - I visited an electronics factory in China.)

I think the Nike Overpriced Shoe Company should be glad pay for having the Nike name on that sports area. They don't seem to have any imagination or finesse. Maybe battling the Frogies has warped their minds. Maybe that is why the price of their shoes is so high.

And the Nike Overpriced Shoe Company legal bureaucracy is whining about the village of Vernon Hills, Illinois naming a sports park Nike - for free !!!

Suggestion:

The village of Vernon Hills, Illinois should offer to name their new sports field "Nike Sports Complex" to the advertising part of the Nike Overpriced Shoe Company. The city could say that the Nike logo would be inappropriate on village property but that an image of a Nike Hercules would be a worthy substitute.

The price to Nike for this advertising springboard could be a lighting system or a scoreboard system for the sports complex. I bet Nike Sales would be delighted!! I also bet Nike Sales would win over Nike Legal on this one -

A little finesse on the part of the village should beat the Nike bureaucracy and get some goodies to boot :-))

Now - how can I negotiate a 6% commission on this one? ;-))

End of rant

Back to home

from http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2003/09/22/daily35.html

cached here in case this too disappears

September 25, 2003

Nike, FIFA in trademark squabble

Beaverton-based Nike Inc. has sued the Federation Internationale de Football Association, soccer's international governing body, in a trademark dispute.

Nike said it was entitled to use the words "USA 2003" to promote the female U.S. soccer team despite claims by the association that those words violate its trademark rights, according to the Associated Press.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, Nike said that it wanted to take pre-emptive measures after FIFA threatened its own legal action.

In its suit, Nike claims FIFA wrote a letter to Nike recently saying FIFA has defended other trademark violations successfully in the past with regards to "France 98," "Korea/Japan 2002" and "Germany 2006."

FIFA's letter warned Nike it was engaging in unfair competition and false advertising and was likely to confuse consumers, who might believe that Nike was sponsoring events staged by the association.

Nike disputed these claims in the filing, and asked a federal judge to declare that its use of "USA 2003" does not represent unfair competition and false advertising and does not violate any laws or rights of the association.