Abdullah the Butcher
Banned
Michigan was considering leaving Adidas over child labor or something.
To go to who, Nike? That would be hilarious.Michigan was considering leaving Adidas over child labor or something.
#UnderArmourTo go to who, Nike? That would be hilarious.Michigan was considering leaving Adidas over child labor or something.
Actually, it would make sense, cause then they could actually switch back to the maize and blue that they're known for. Nike has a trademark on their maize color, so they haven't been able to use it since they joined team adidas.To go to who, Nike? That would be hilarious.Michigan was considering leaving Adidas over child labor or something.
Actually, it would make sense, cause then they could actually switch back to the maize and blue that they're known for. Nike has a trademark on their maize color, so they haven't been able to use it since they joined team adidas.To go to who, Nike? That would be hilarious.Michigan was considering leaving Adidas over child labor or something.
Well played, sir. Nike is a peach, by the way. "Screw your tradition, we have a copyright".
Yup, this. Michigan can pick any pantone swatch they want.You can't copyright an actual color - sounds like they just copyrighted the name or a technical RGB number or something. Especially since their football unis look exactly the same.
Those are freakin slick. Washington has a nice look.Weird "northwest frost" spackle helmets aside, Nike rolled out some cool new Washington unis today: http://www.huskiesne...DB_OEM_ID=30200
![]()
Landlord, while you're correct that you can't trademark a specific color for general use, you can trademark it for a specific use, such as on a sports uniform. That's covered here:
http://freakonomics....demark-a-color/
From what I understand, Nike has a trademark on the color "maize" for use in athletic uniforms, so Michigan had to switch to the color "sun" when they switched to adidas. From what any of us can tell, the two colors look basically the same, but Michigan fans insist they're different and they are technically different colors.
If Michigan or adidas really wanted to, they could probably take Nike to court for use of the maize color, but it's not really worth the time or money for something as trivial as that.
I just know that a lot of Michigan fans complain that the football team's yellow isn't the right shade. I'm like you. I can't tell the difference.Landlord, while you're correct that you can't trademark a specific color for general use, you can trademark it for a specific use, such as on a sports uniform. That's covered here:
http://freakonomics....demark-a-color/
From what I understand, Nike has a trademark on the color "maize" for use in athletic uniforms, so Michigan had to switch to the color "sun" when they switched to adidas. From what any of us can tell, the two colors look basically the same, but Michigan fans insist they're different and they are technically different colors.
If Michigan or adidas really wanted to, they could probably take Nike to court for use of the maize color, but it's not really worth the time or money for something as trivial as that.
Eh.
When you're dealing with clothes, it doesn't really matter. Clothes fade in the sun and the wash and get stained and etc. It's the same color or at least it is equally as close to the same color as a pair of mudded up and faded pants that were the same color.
Anyways, my point was that the highlighter yellow that their basketball team uses wasn't because they weren't allowed to use the more traditional color - they did it on purpose because it's popular.