Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Justices rule against NFL over apparel licensing

    Zeus wrote:
    ejmat wrote:
    i_bleed_purple wrote:
    Even more interesting and relevent to us though, is the Williams' case.

    In the Williams' case, the NFL is trying to establish that they are one large employer, and are not restricted to MInnesota State law, when in fact, the Supreme court is saying the NFL is made up of 32 different employers.

    WIth the Williams' being employees of the Minnesota Vikings, and not the NFL, they would be subject to Minnesota state law.

    Hopefully this will help speed up this whole process, as I just want it to be done with.
    This is my thought exactly. I know the two rulings are totally different from one another. However, it would seem to me if there is a ruling by the courts stating each team is a separate entity then it would somewhat contradict itself if the court rules for the NFL in the WIlliams' case.
    Selling hats is a tad different from the labor issue.

    And the fact remains - and will remain - that the Williams' representative, the NFLPA, negotiated a labor agreement with the NFL (the representative of the 32 separate entities) that clearly says the players are responsible for what they put into their bodies. I fail to see how this changes that.

    =Z=
    I hear ya Z. I'm not discounting that. The only point I am trying to make here is that is this instance the courts are saying that each team is it's own entity. Menaing the Vikings are in the state of MN. Which tells me they are bound by state laws. It can't be one way for one ruling and not the other.

  2. #12
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278

    Re:Justices rule against NFL over apparel licensing

    Zeus wrote:
    Texas Viking wrote:
    Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the National Football League over its exclusive contract with an apparel maker in one of the most important sports law cases in decades.

    In a 9-0 decision Monday, the justices said the league can be considered 32 separate teams, not a single business.


    http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/24/nfl.lawsuit/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn
    Dammit! I was going to post that, but actually spent 5 minutes trying to find the original thread on the American Needle lawsuit from last year. LOL!

    Now, I know most here are bored to tears by anything that actually has to do with the BUSINESS of football, this is kind-of important. A ruling in the NFL's favor would have opened them up to all sorts or protections against anti-trust actions. But they didn't get that. The Supremes see the NFL (9-0, as noted above) as 32 teams who compete directly against one another.

    Bit of a blow for the small company (American Needle) but it has large implications for future issues.

    =Z=
    Didn't American needle essentially win this battle? The NFL and Reebok apear to be the losers.

  3. #13
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re:Justices rule against NFL over apparel licensing

    jmcdon00 wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    Texas Viking wrote:
    Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the National Football League over its exclusive contract with an apparel maker in one of the most important sports law cases in decades.

    In a 9-0 decision Monday, the justices said the league can be considered 32 separate teams, not a single business.


    http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/24/nfl.lawsuit/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn
    Dammit! I was going to post that, but actually spent 5 minutes trying to find the original thread on the American Needle lawsuit from last year. LOL!

    Now, I know most here are bored to tears by anything that actually has to do with the BUSINESS of football, this is kind-of important. A ruling in the NFL's favor would have opened them up to all sorts or protections against anti-trust actions. But they didn't get that. The Supremes see the NFL (9-0, as noted above) as 32 teams who compete directly against one another.

    Bit of a blow for the small company (American Needle) but it has large implications for future issues.
    Didn't American needle essentially win this battle? The NFL and Reebok apear to be the losers.
    Nope. American Needle wanted the NFL to be seen as one entity so they could be sued (collectively) for violating anti-trust laws. The NFL wanted to be seen as one entity so they could get anti-trust protections (such as those given to MLB). They both wanted the same thing, but for different purposes (at least that's what I recall reading).

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,206

    Re:Justices rule against NFL over apparel licensing

    Zeus wrote:
    jmcdon00 wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    Texas Viking wrote:
    Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the National Football League over its exclusive contract with an apparel maker in one of the most important sports law cases in decades.

    In a 9-0 decision Monday, the justices said the league can be considered 32 separate teams, not a single business.


    http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/24/nfl.lawsuit/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn
    Dammit! I was going to post that, but actually spent 5 minutes trying to find the original thread on the American Needle lawsuit from last year. LOL!

    Now, I know most here are bored to tears by anything that actually has to do with the BUSINESS of football, this is kind-of important. A ruling in the NFL's favor would have opened them up to all sorts or protections against anti-trust actions. But they didn't get that. The Supremes see the NFL (9-0, as noted above) as 32 teams who compete directly against one another.

    Bit of a blow for the small company (American Needle) but it has large implications for future issues.
    Didn't American needle essentially win this battle? The NFL and Reebok apear to be the losers.
    Nope. American Needle wanted the NFL to be seen as one entity so they could be sued (collectively) for violating anti-trust laws. The NFL wanted to be seen as one entity so they could get anti-trust protections (such as those given to MLB). They both wanted the same thing, but for different purposes (at least that's what I recall reading).

    =Z=
    I believe that if the NFL was determined to be a single entity in terms of logos/trademarks then they would be exempt from the relevant portions of the antitrust law for this case. At least that's my take after watching this video at ProFootballTalk.com.

    So I think it's a win for American Needle.
    When the age of the Vikings came to a close, they must have sensed it. Probably, they gathered together one evening, slapped each other on the back and said, "Hey, good job." - Jack Handey [Deep Thoughts]

  5. #15
    gregair13's Avatar
    gregair13 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    14,578

    Re:Justices rule against NFL over apparel licensing

    The way to solve this is make the NFL its own country so it can do what it wants.
    We're bringing purple back.

  6. #16
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re:Justices rule against NFL over apparel licensing

    Overlord wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    jmcdon00 wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    Texas Viking wrote:
    Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the National Football League over its exclusive contract with an apparel maker in one of the most important sports law cases in decades.

    In a 9-0 decision Monday, the justices said the league can be considered 32 separate teams, not a single business.


    http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/24/nfl.lawsuit/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn
    Dammit! I was going to post that, but actually spent 5 minutes trying to find the original thread on the American Needle lawsuit from last year. LOL!

    Now, I know most here are bored to tears by anything that actually has to do with the BUSINESS of football, this is kind-of important. A ruling in the NFL's favor would have opened them up to all sorts or protections against anti-trust actions. But they didn't get that. The Supremes see the NFL (9-0, as noted above) as 32 teams who compete directly against one another.

    Bit of a blow for the small company (American Needle) but it has large implications for future issues.
    Didn't American needle essentially win this battle? The NFL and Reebok apear to be the losers.
    Nope. American Needle wanted the NFL to be seen as one entity so they could be sued (collectively) for violating anti-trust laws. The NFL wanted to be seen as one entity so they could get anti-trust protections (such as those given to MLB). They both wanted the same thing, but for different purposes (at least that's what I recall reading).
    I believe that if the NFL was determined to be a single entity in terms of logos/trademarks then they would be exempt from the relevant portions of the antitrust law for this case. At least that's my take after watching this video at ProFootballTalk.com.

    So I think it's a win for American Needle.
    Just read a bunch of blogs and articles and they also seem to think it's a win for American Needle. So I'll go with that. Wish I could recall where I had seen the other opinion.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Tom Brady to promote UGG apparel...
    By Culpepper_4717 in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-01-2010, 12:34 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-28-2008, 05:00 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-05-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. NFL Apparel commercial with Vikes fans vs. Bears fan...
    By cajunvike in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-11-2006, 09:31 PM
  5. Justices side with Anna Nicole Smith
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-02-2006, 05:22 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •