NEW YORK JETS LOGO CREATOR SUES TEAM, NFL ... Pay Me For My Design!!!

[bicketybam]

 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Doggin94it said:

That's not actually how this works, unless "creating the logo" was part of his job duties. If you design a new logo for McDonalds in your spare time while you also have a job flipping burgers for them, it's yours, not theirs. If they want to use it, they need to license it from you

You know that you can send a C&D or a DMCA takedown notice about that if she registers the copyright, right?

Since 1978, the law has allowed an author to terminate a copyright license in the 35th year after the license was entered. We're well past that.

This is what I was thinking, but the team used it for so long (and so many years ago), that by now the IP is probably implied as team ownership (not just not-his, but not-public domain either; it's Woody's now, and was Leon's before him).

But yeah, unless this guy was employed as a designer (or employed by the team as whatever and they specifically asked him to take a crack at this), then it should/would have been his own IP -- that is, if he'd made a stink about it decades ago.

There's also a chance that, had he made such a, "Hey this is mine," stink before they decided to use it back then - which may have required royalties & such - that they may not have used it in the first place (let alone use it again now). Then again if he had created such a conflict back then, his job may have found its way into being in jeopardy by some suddenly-appearing, unrelated offense. 

Regardless, it's been almost 50 years. He's SOL, and frankly - other than the David/Goliath optics - he should be SOL; businesses can't operate like that, where decades later such claims are made about any number of things. He's had all the time in the world. What this is isn't being screwed-over; it's his regret at not acting when he had the chance. I've got no love for Woody Johnson, but sorry that's just tough titty and should be.

Woody could give him some free gear & such with that logo on it just to be nice, but that's it, and on paper it'd have to be a gift, not compensation. That's my guess / Holiday Inn Express level of expertise lol.

[Thai Jet]

4 hours ago, Claymation said:

I look forward to Mike Florio's take and how Aaron Rodgers is the mastermind behind stiffing this gentlemen out of his $10,000 dollar design. He worked for the team and any intellectual property (IP) created by him while he was employed by the Jets are now the NY Jets IP. Is Aaron's case on kicking this dog to the curb.

lol   Is there a bigger A$$ on the NFL beat than Mike "F'in" Florio ? BTW: Rodgers also talked Putin into invading Ukraine. 

[Maxman]

He took some time to think about how he felt about all this I guess. Pondered it for some time.

[Claymation]

1 hour ago, Doggin94it said:

That's not actually how this works, unless "creating the logo" was part of his job duties. If you design a new logo for McDonalds in your spare time while you also have a job flipping burgers for them, it's yours, not theirs. If they want to use it, they need to license it from you

You know that you can send a C&D or a DMCA takedown notice about that if she registers the copyright, right?

Since 1978, the law has allowed an author to terminate a copyright license in the 35th year after the license was entered. We're well past that.

That's exactly how that works, when you are hired, companies make you sign a waiver stating anything created while working for the "Said" company is the property of the "Said" company. His job was film and video director. That is in the scope of his job.

Plus, The mark in question has been registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office for nearly 50 years. The mark has been used continuously in numerous iterations since that time. 

 

[Claymation]

13 minutes ago, Maxman said:

He took some time to think about how he felt about all this I guess. Pondered it for some time.

I guess he didn't enjoy being honored by the Jets this past winter/spring.

[Adoni Beast]

This is really ridiculous. He made the logo when he worked for the team. Why did he not bring this up before, especially back when the logo was used for decades?

The team made a classy move (a rarity) by making a video and giving the dude credit for making the logo and he turns around and tries to use it as leverage? 

[Rich Thornburgh]

Hopefully this forces us to go back to the classic uniforms

[Rich Thornburgh]

38 minutes ago, Thai Jet said:

lol   Is there a bigger A$$ on the NFL beat than Mike "F'in" Florio ? BTW: Rodgers also talked Putin into invading Ukraine. 

Florio is a dumb guy

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

But yeah, unless this guy was employed as a designer (or employed by the team as whatever and they specifically asked him to take a crack at this), then it should/would have been his own IP -- that is, if he'd made a stink about it decades ago.

I believe case law will not support this conclusion, I'm aware of several cases where things were designed on company time, by people whose specific job title/description was not "design stuff", who sued and failed to win.  The old "other duties as assigned, you created this because we asked/needed it, and on company time, on company computers/stationary, so now it's ours" seems to win most times.  The fact this one was used by the team for several decades makes it much harder to complain now as well.  Intellectual rights have a tendency to lapse if not rigorously and legally defended by it's owner.

I myself have done some high-end graphic design work "on company time/computers" that got used and put into widespread use, and I was not compensated for it beyond my (at the time) rather low level position as a non-designer, but I don't believe for a second that I would be successful in court if I sued.  

@Doggin94it would love to know your take, as you know I am not a lawyer but I believe you are.  What say you?

EDIT: Sorry Doggin, I see your reply now.  I agree with you.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Warfish said:

I believe case law will not support this conclusion, I'm aware of several cases where things were designed on company time, by people whose specific job title/description was not "design stuff", who sued and failed to win.  The old "other duties as assigned, you created this because we asked/needed it, and on company time, on company computers/stationary, so now it's ours" seems to win most times.  The fact this one was used by the team for several decades makes it much harder to complain now as well.  Intellectual rights have a tendency to lapse if not rigorously and legally defended by it's owner.

I myself have done some high-end graphic design work "on company time/computers" that got used and put into widespread use, and I was not compensated for it beyond my (at the time) rather low level position as a non-designer, but I don't believe for a second that I would be successful in court if I sued.  

@Doggin94it would love to know your take, as you know I am not a lawyer but I believe you are.  What say you?

EDIT: Sorry Doggin, I see your reply now.  I agree with you.

I think (in this case nearly 50 years later) the team would need evidence that it was produced while he was on the clock and not at home. 

Everything he does - even if it's something of interest/use to the team - doesn't belong to the team just because he works for them (nor should it).

There's no evidence he was "assigned" the task, and just because it's something they had use/need of that still wouldn't apply (I wouldn't think) unless they can show he did so while on the clock (and particularly if he was using company resources to create it; like if he'd used the company's graphics/computer software, if that had existed back then). If it was made on company computers during business hours while they were paying the employee, yes it's the company's property. 

It's all moot because it's too late, and because he never pushed the issue while the team used the logo for 20 years. If he was suing within the actionable time frame he'd probably have to prove that he created this at home (or somewhere not at work), or if at work that he created it only while on his lunch and/or coffee breaks, and did so on his own personal laptop or something, and that he did it by himself. The burden of proof for all of that would be on him, and good luck with such records for anyone, which is probably why your experience has been the company always prevailing.

If he wasn't asked to do it, and he came up with it on his own (particularly while he wasn't on the clock) then it's his -- or anyway, it would have been if he'd made a stink about it within a timely fashion. 

This is about him being pissed at himself for not acting while he could, and missing that financial opportunity when he had the chance. I can sympathize with that - we all have regrets - but hey I could have put all my disposable money & savings into bitcoin in 2013. I didn't, and that window has closed, so I'm stuck talking to those like you (and me) on JetNation instead of a better and higher class of people who drink tea with raised pinkies. Oh, and also I should have become a fan of a different football team, while I'm at it.  

[Warfish]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I think (in this case nearly 50 years later) the team would need evidence that it was produced while he was on the clock and not at home. 

Everything he does - even if it's something of interest/use to the team - doesn't belong to the team just because he works for them (nor should it).

There's no evidence he was "assigned" the task, and just because it's something they had use/need of that still wouldn't apply (I wouldn't think) unless they can show he did so while on the clock (and particularly if he was using company resources to create it; like if he'd used the company's graphics/computer software, if that had existed back then). If it was made on company computers during business hours while they were paying the employee, yes it's the company's property. 

As I said, I believe the history of case law in these kinds of intellectual property cases does not support your position, nor does the burden of evidence lay only on the team as you seem to imply.  But I'd happily defer to an actual IP Lawyer, since I only play one on TV.

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It's all moot because it's too late, and because he never pushed the issue while the team used the logo for 20 years. If he was suing within the actionable time frame he'd probably have to prove that he created this at home (or somewhere not at work), or if at work that he created it only while on his lunch and/or coffee breaks, and did so on his own personal laptop or something, and that he did it by himself. The burden of proof for all of that would be on him, and good luck with such records for anyone, which is probably why your experience has been the company always prevailing.

If he wasn't asked to do it, and he came up with it on his own (particularly while he wasn't on the clock) then it's his -- or anyway, it would have been if he'd made a stink about it within a timely fashion. 

This is about him being pissed at himself for not acting while he could, and missing that financial opportunity when he had the chance. I can sympathize with that - we all have regrets - but hey I could have put all my disposable money & savings into bitcoin in 2013. I didn't, and that window has closed, so I'm stuck talking to those like you (and me) on JetNation instead of a better and higher class of people who drink tea with raised pinkies. Oh, and also I should have become a fan of a different football team, while I'm at it.  

I think the courts will dismiss this rather quickly, if it gets that far, and presuming the Jets don't pay him off to make it go away.  

[Sperm Edwards]

29 minutes ago, Warfish said:

As I said, I believe the history of case law in these kinds of intellectual property cases does not support your position, nor does the burden of evidence lay only on the team as you seem to imply.  But I'd happily defer to an actual IP Lawyer, since I only play one on TV.

I think the courts will dismiss this rather quickly, if it gets that far, and presuming the Jets don't pay him off to make it go away.  

I don't think so. If someone made something on his own, also on his own time (at home in particular), and not using company resources to make it, then it doesn't belong to the company. Find me case law to the contrary if you think so.

They aren't going to pay him because he has no case (unless there's some paper trail of circumstances, but I don't know what that might be; but say he has a company memo that indicated Leon Hess said if he makes a claim or sues the team over this then he's fired.").

They may give him a gift or something to be nice, but they'd have to stress that a gift is all it is -- it can't be misconstrued as any type of compensation. Otherwise then it's a new transaction, so the clock starts now to make it again actionable in the future (e.g. the compensation was unfair and should be revisited because the team concealed that the logo was also being used for this or that other  profitable revenue stream they hid from him in 2024's settlement; or whatever other reason his representation can think of).

From that point of view, they might even expose themselves more if they pay him off, versus now where it's lousy David/Goliath optics but they're not actually liable because of how much time has transpired.

Playing an IP attorney may or may not trump my Holiday Inn Express overnight experience. Time will tell.

[Warfish]

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

I don't think so. If someone made something on his own, also on his own time (at home in particular), and not using company resources to make it, then it doesn't belong to the company. Find me case law to the contrary if you think so.

I've said what I think.  My caring about this story at all has more than been exceeded at this point as it is, lol.  So I'll respectfully pass.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

They

I like to break up your posts.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

aren't

Really.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

going

Still doing it.  You twitching yet?

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

to

to.....what?  I'm dying to know!

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

pay him

OMG nooooo!

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

because he has no case

What's funny is I know you're triggered right now.

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

(unless there's some paper trail of circumstances, but I don't know what that might be; but say he has a company memo that indicated Leon Hess said if he makes a claim or sues the team over this then he's fired.").

They may give him a gift or something to be nice, but they'd have to stress that a gift is all it is -- it can't be misconstrued as any type of compensation. Otherwise then it's a new transaction, so the clock starts now to make it again actionable in the future (e.g. the compensation was unfair and should be revisited because the team concealed that the logo was also being used for this or that other  profitable revenue stream they hid from him in 2024's settlement; or whatever other reason his representation can think of).

From that point of view, they might even expose themselves more if they pay him off, versus now where it's lousy David/Goliath optics but they're not actually liable because of how much time has transpired.

Playing an IP attorney may or may not trump my Holiday Inn Express overnight experience. Time will tell.

Aye, as with so many things, "we'll see" is the only right answer for now.

P.S. "paying him off" = legal settlement.  No one pays someone off without that in corporate 'Merica.  That doesn't "expose them more", lol.

[Dcat]

5 hours ago, Doggin94it said:

 

You know that you can send a C&D or a DMCA takedown notice about that if she registers the copyright, right?

 

Indeed.  Do it all the time.  Funny thing is they always take them down.  Then they come back.

[Dunnie]

I don't think so. If someone made something on his own, also on his own time (at home in particular), and not using company resources to make it, then it doesn't belong to the company. Find me case law to the contrary if you think so.
They aren't going to pay him because he has no case (unless there's some paper trail of circumstances, but I don't know what that might be; but say he has a company memo that indicated Leon Hess said if he makes a claim or sues the team over this then he's fired.").
They may give him a gift or something to be nice, but they'd have to stress that a gift is all it is -- it can't be misconstrued as any type of compensation. Otherwise then it's a new transaction, so the clock starts now to make it again actionable in the future (e.g. the compensation was unfair and should be revisited because the team concealed that the logo was also being used for this or that other  profitable revenue stream they hid from him in 2024's settlement; or whatever other reason his representation can think of).
From that point of view, they might even expose themselves more if they pay him off, versus now where it's lousy David/Goliath optics but they're not actually liable because of how much time has transpired.
Playing an IP attorney may or may not trump my Holiday Inn Express overnight experience. Time will tell.

Unless the guy copyrighted/trademarked that logo to himself before handing it over .. he has no case.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[#27TheDominator]

10 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

Yea. The logo was traded for premium membership. Once banned, I invoiced them. Then came the threats. Man babies. 

You sent them an invoice for $55?

6 hours ago, Doggin94it said:

That's not actually how this works, unless "creating the logo" was part of his job duties. If you design a new logo for McDonalds in your spare time while you also have a job flipping burgers for them, it's yours, not theirs. If they want to use it, they need to license it from you

You know that you can send a C&D or a DMCA takedown notice about that if she registers the copyright, right?

Since 1978, the law has allowed an author to terminate a copyright license in the 35th year after the license was entered. We're well past that.

My guess was his reps figured they could hold the team up by throwing something in the works close to the season starting.  It would make more sense if he were a younger guy trying to drum up work for an independent business, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

7 hours ago, The Crusher said:

You get to pick from three! One has codeine, don’t pick that one,

You're no fun anymore!

[Integrity28]

4 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

You sent them an invoice for $55?

I told them how many hours I spent designing it, what my hourly rate was, and that I had given them a deal for the VIP thing - then said if I could collect VIP membership as payment, I'd have to invoice for true cost. Not $55, even then I was charging over $80/hour for design work.

[Jetmaster Flex]

19 hours ago, TBJ said:

Jim Pons -- the man who created one of the New York Jets' logos -- is now suing the team and the NFL ... demanding he be paid for their use of his design.

Pons filed the lawsuit, obtained by TMZ Sports, in New York on Monday ... claiming he made the now-iconic emblem way back in the 1970s, after he had been working for the team as a film and video director.

Pons says in '78, the Jets were looking for a redesign -- and when he submitted his logo that featured a jet plane above the letters "E-T-S" ... team officials loved it, and began using it.

NY ended up slapping it on its uniforms until 1997, when it switched things up. But, in 2022, the franchise revealed it was going back to Pons' design part-time. In early 2024, the org. announced it'd be using the design full-time going forward.

Initially, Pons -- a former rock 'n roll musician -- was stoked over it all ... even sitting down this past spring with the team for a feature that explained how he came up with the imagery.

In the special, Pons was seen smiling as he reflected on things.

However, in his suit, Pons said he was anything but pleased with the Jets and the NFL -- believing he owns the mark which he says he created outside of the scope of his job with the team ... so now he thinks they owe him some serious compensation for his work.

Pons claims the team and the league are making millions off of it ... and it's clear he wants his share.

The 81-year-old is suing for unspecified damages. He's also asking a judge to order the cancelation of the Jets' trademark of his logo. In addition, he wants a judge to rule that NY can no longer use his logo on their uniforms and merch ... at least not without his consent and compensation.

https://www.tmz.com/2024/07/01/new-york-jets-logo-creator-sues-team-nfl-wants-payment-for-design/

Pay that man

[RutgersJetFan]

2 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

You sent them an invoice for $55?

Holy sh*t that was what that lunatic charged wasn’t it? Forgot all about that.

[JetsfaninNorthHollywood]

Similar thing happened with the Ravens logo. 

Logo artist files copyright lawsuits against Ravens, NFL – Baltimore Sun

 

[bicketybam]

I think his logo sucks. Can't stand it. This is the one that matters.

[Sperm Edwards]

13 hours ago, Warfish said:

I've said what I think.  My caring about this story at all has more than been exceeded at this point as it is, lol.  So I'll respectfully pass.

I like to break up your posts.

Really.

Still doing it.  You twitching yet?

to.....what?  I'm dying to know!

OMG nooooo!

What's funny is I know you're triggered right now.

Aye, as with so many things, "we'll see" is the only right answer for now.

P.S. "paying him off" = legal settlement.  No one pays someone off without that in corporate 'Merica.  That doesn't "expose them more", lol.

Legal settlements can still lead to a future suit if there was an allegation of fraud induced by omission or other reasons prior to the settlement. I don’t know what country you’ve been living in where that’s not the case.The best, guaranteed way of avoiding it is to do nothing in terms of compensating him.

Also cut that out. It is unseemly to knowingly trigger someone of my illustrious societal stature. 

[Sperm Edwards]

11 hours ago, Dunnie said:

Unless the guy copyrighted/trademarked that logo to himself before handing it over .. he has no case.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

I’ll defer to those who do this, but I don’t think you’re right.

My layman’s take on it is if I make an original drawing or painting or if I write a song or a piece of literary art on my own, and have tangible proof I created it before you made any claim or use of it (e.g. I mailed a separate copy of an original song recording or a movie screenplay to myself before you stole it from me (particularly if I showed it to you or you had access to seeing it), and I still have that unopened package stamped by the post office; or in the internet era if I just have some date/time stamped evidence like a recording I emailed to myself, my wife, etc. or posted it on my own website, you can’t just take/use it as yours because I didn’t register it with the copyright office. Once a work of art is “fixed” in a tangible medium, it’s automatically copyrighted. So an original drawing on paper or as a digital file (rather than an idea for such); an original song recording or written sheet music; an original written-out manuscript and not just some verbal sharing of an idea I had. Also further that such original creation wasn’t a condition of my employment, of course (if Ape worked for me as a graphic designer and he created something cool I asked him to make in that capacity, it isn’t his unless his artwork copyright-retention was part of our arrangement that, say, I get licensed use for x amount of time, and/or only in certain mediums - e.g. web but not print - but it’s still his intellectual property).

That’s not the reason he has no case.

First off, from Doggin94it’s input above, time seems to be the easiest, automatic disqualifying reason. Even if time for his claim hadn’t clearly expired, in the past he surely lacked tangible proof he created this on his own personal time (not work time) and without his employer prodding or assigning or suggesting to him to give it a shot as part of his employment. If he’d thought of suing years ago, I’d think that such burden of proof was upon him, and that’d be pretty difficult unless he had a postmarked or certified letter saying, “Hey I know this is not even my department and you didn’t ask me to create this, but just for kicks I drew up this cool Jets logo below, on my own after work. Just thought you’d find it interesting.” That or, before showing it to the team, maybe like a dated video of him creating it at home (e.g. paper receipt of film developing of his Super8 film since other time-stamping video technology didn’t exist in ‘78). Absent a record that the team acknowledged he made this on his own, he’d have still needed something like that and for almost 50 years hadn’t gone by; in particular with his then-employer visibly using it as the team’s official logo for 20 years - with his obvious knowledge - where his decades-long silence and legal inaction probably constituted assent that he has no claim to it as his own property.

[neckdemon]

18 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

He said I was trying to strong arm him to get out if my permaban. I said if he cannot provide my compensation as a JI VIP membership, then he needed to compensate me in cash. He went cuckoo. 

lol is this legit? i thought you were kidding at first

[Dunnie]

I’ll defer to those who do this, but I don’t think you’re right.
My layman’s take on it is if I make an original drawing or painting or if I write a song or a piece of literary art on my own, and have tangible proof I created it before you made any claim or use of it (e.g. I mailed a separate copy of an original song recording or a movie screenplay to myself before you stole it from me (particularly if I showed it to you or you had access to seeing it), and I still have that unopened package stamped by the post office; or in the internet era if I just have some date/time stamped evidence like a recording I emailed to myself, my wife, etc. or posted it on my own website, you can’t just take/use it as yours because I didn’t register it with the copyright office. Once a work of art is “fixed” in a tangible medium, it’s automatically copyrighted. So an original drawing on paper or as a digital file (rather than an idea for such); an original song recording or written sheet music; an original written-out manuscript and not just some verbal sharing of an idea I had. Also further that such original creation wasn’t a condition of my employment, of course (if Ape worked for me as a graphic designer and he created something cool I asked him to make in that capacity, it isn’t his unless his artwork copyright-retention was part of our arrangement that, say, I get licensed use for x amount of time, and/or only in certain mediums - e.g. web but not print - but it’s still his intellectual property).
That’s not the reason he has no case.
First off, from Doggin94it’s input above, time seems to be the easiest, automatic disqualifying reason. Even if time for his claim hadn’t clearly expired, in the past he surely lacked tangible proof he created this on his own personal time (not work time) and without his employer prodding or assigning or suggesting to him to give it a shot as part of his employment. If he’d thought of suing years ago, I’d think that such burden of proof was upon him, and that’d be pretty difficult unless he had a postmarked or certified letter saying, “Hey I know this is not even my department and you didn’t ask me to create this, but just for kicks I drew up this cool Jets logo below, on my own after work. Just thought you’d find it interesting.” That or, before showing it to the team, maybe like a dated video of him creating it at home (e.g. paper receipt of film developing of his Super8 film since other time-stamping video technology didn’t exist in ‘78). Absent a record that the team acknowledged he made this on his own, he’d have still needed something like that and for almost 50 years hadn’t gone by; in particular with his then-employer visibly using it as the team’s official logo for 20 years - with his obvious knowledge - where his decades-long silence and legal inaction probably constituted assent that he has no claim to it as his own property.

This ... Is awesome ... But I'm still not sure ... Any material rights lawyers out there ??

If I create a yo yo ... Sell them unregistered for years ... Then a corporation registers their copy ... I always thought I'd be outta luck.

I can see your point ... I'm curious now. There are reasons logos are trademarked right?

He would have definitely had to have drawn the original away from the office to avoid it being the companies IP id assume.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[TuscanyTile2]

22 hours ago, PFSIKH said:

Is this akin to the Cubs' curse of the bill goat?  It took them 71 years to overcome that curse.  

71?  It was 108 years. 

The famous line by Cubs' broadcaster Jack Brickhouse was "any team can have a bad century".

[PFSIKH]

2 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

71?  It was 108 years. 

The famous line by Cubs' broadcaster Jack Brickhouse was "any team can have a bad century".

I was thinking of when it happened versus their last title.  You are right.

[Warfish]

5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Legal settlements can still lead to a future suit if there was an allegation of fraud induced by omission or other reasons prior to the settlement. I don’t know what country you’ve been living in where that’s not the case.The best, guaranteed way of avoiding it is to do nothing in terms of compensating him.

/shrug, if you say so.  I think you're off the mark on every reply so far, but I guess we'll see how it all plays out.

5 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Also cut that out. It is unseemly to knowingly trigger someone of my illustrious societal stature. 

It's only done with love.  The kind of love a man has for another man....er.....in a football forum kind of way....er.......no homo? 

Is no homo still a thing, I feel like that's not a thing anymore, it's very 1996.

[#27TheDominator]

13 hours ago, RutgersJetFan said:

Holy sh*t that was what that lunatic charged wasn’t it? Forgot all about that.

A bargain at any price!

[#27TheDominator]

I did not watch the video and care more about my broken pencil tip, but. . . part of me wonders if there are any admissions in the video that help his case or had some ambulance chaser reach out?  Did they say he worked on it at home?  That it wasn't "other duties as assigned" or something?  

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, #27TheDominator said:

I did not watch the video and care more about my broken pencil tip, but. . . part of me wonders if there are any admissions in the video that help his case or had some ambulance chaser reach out?  Did they say he worked on it at home?  That it wasn't "other duties as assigned" or something?  

Would that even matter 46+ years later? If it's new evidence that was just uncovered/discovered, does that therefore restart the clock ("I couldn't sue way back when because I had no case/proof, but now I've got proof for the first time")? 

[Dcat]

11 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Would that even matter 46+ years later? If it's new evidence that was just uncovered/discovered, does that therefore restart the clock ("I couldn't sue way back when because I had no case/proof, but now I've got proof for the first time")? 

Send him a thank-you helmet and offer lifetime admission to all games.  

Oh, the pain.

[Sperm Edwards]

12 minutes ago, Dcat said:

Send him a thank-you helmet and offer lifetime admission to all games.  

Oh, the pain.

Lifetime? Shrewd idea seeing how he's 81.  

[Sperm Edwards]

6 hours ago, Dunnie said:

This ... Is awesome ... But I'm still not sure ... Any material rights lawyers out there ??

If I create a yo yo ... Sell them unregistered for years ... Then a corporation registers their copy ... I always thought I'd be outta luck.

I can see your point ... I'm curious now. There are reasons logos are trademarked right?

He would have definitely had to have drawn the original away from the office to avoid it being the companies IP id assume.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk


 

https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html

When is my work protected?

Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

Do I have to register with your office to be protected?

No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section “Copyright Registration.”

He can register it (now) in order to sue, if it'll even be granted to him (he'd have to first challenge the team's existing copyright for it to get the copyright granted to him instead), but registering/applying for a copyright didn't need to occur in 1978 or whenever he created it just for a copyright to exist.

His current hurdles seem to stem more from:

(a) timing/expiration (well beyond 35 years);

(b) since he was employed by the Jets at the time, the burden of proof would be upon him to show he voluntarily created this on his own & not as part of a job request or requirement and/or during work hours; this proof should be particularly important since he acknowledges the team told employees it was looking to change the logo (showing this was a current company task); 

(c) probably some form of prior assent by silence [that it's the team's and not his] since he didn't make a case over it for all these decades including the 20 years this was quite publicly the team's official logo, knowing the team itself surely had a registered copyright for it all this time.