This makes no sense to me. Obviously the NFL wants to keep close tabs on it’s copyright, but why would they not want more viewers who might drive up advertising costs. Clearly, I’m missing something big here.
Anyone that wants to reference the Super Bowl, can (and) do so easily by refering to a “super” game that’s usually played in a “bowl” shaped arena. At least that’s how they get around it here.
So, why the “don’t say the name” policy?
It’s trademarked.
You can’t use it without getting permission.
I understand that. My question is why would they not allow free advertising?
Because they charge big bux to allow people to use that trademarked name. Why give it away for free, thus making it impossible to charge for it.
The NFL doesn’t need free advertising for the Super Bowl. It gets plenty of publicity already.
Say you wanted to have the dnooman Super Bowl Party, and charge people to attend. Now, who needs the other side more–does the NFL need you to help promote its game, or do you need the tie-in with the game to help promote your party? I think you’ll agree the latter is the case.
So either you give the NFL a cut, or your party becomes the dnooman Big Football Game Celebration, which just isn’t the same.
[QUOTE=Freddy the Pig]
The NFL doesn’t need free advertising for the Super Bowl. It gets plenty of publicity already.
Say you wanted to have the dnooman Super Bowl Party, and charge people to attend. Now, who needs the other side more–does the NFL need you to help promote its game, or do you need the tie-in with the game to help promote your party? I think you’ll agree the latter is the case.
QUOTE]
I agree. Does the NFL actually get people to pay to use the name? I know for sure that they’ve made no money in my hometown due to the aforementioned “creative wordings” for local radio promos.
Unless somebody knows the difference in value between payed licensees, and potential marketing value, I’ll have no real answer.
Super Bowl. There, I used their trademark.
Possession of a trademark does not give one absolute power over its use.
Right. You can use it all you want for non-commercial usages. If you had a news program and said “The Super Bowl is…” they could do nothing.
But you can’t sell “Super Bowl Hot Dogs” without permission.
Just to point out, they are *really *strict about this too. They *will *sick a team of lawyers on a litte Ma’ & Pa’ operation if they run an ad for a “Superbowl Sale”.
The only other trademak I’ve (personally) seen protected so closely is “GRAMMY™”, which includes bizzare restrictions on use such as the word must appear in ALL CAPS, must always have a larger-than-usual “™” mark, and even then you have to get the *placement *of the word in the specific ad approved.
You do not need anyone’s permission to say “Super Bowl” on the radio or TV. If you’ve noticed, sports commentators use the term all the time.
You do need permission to use it in advertising, or to promote a product.
It is the same as the trademark enforcement for the Olympics, which is why you see product advertising that refers only to “the Summer Games”.
You can, however, use the Superb Owl in commercials all you like…
I’m not a trademark lawyer. That said, the general convention is that if you’re capitalizing on someone’s trademark for your own advantage, then you’re infringing the trademark. If you’re Greek, and you open the Olympic Diner, you’ll probably survive a lawsuit if you’re willing to fight it. If you have a Super Bowl sale near the Super Bowl, it’s obvious that you’re trying to use someone else’s trademark to your advantage. If you open a Chinese restaurant in July that’s always open forever and forever, it’s possible that you may be able to call the restaurant Super Bowl, since NFL football doesn’t own any restaurants called Super Bowl (well, that I know of).
Additionally, you have the right of first sale. This means that if you buy Super Bowl tickets, and you want to resell them (in a legal manner), then you have the right to call them what they are – Super Bowl Tickets. I imagine that a radio station could do the very same thing – presuming they have legally aquired (purchased) their tickets, they have the right to call them what they are. I imagine, though, that this isn’t done because at some point the DJ is going to slip and refer to the Super Bowl outside the context of his first sale rights. Hence, it’s better to avoid all use of the trademark.
“…get your high def TV delivered in time for the** big game ** in Jacksoneville, and save 10%…!”
That is ok.
“…buy some Wild Pepper Chips for your Superbowl party, and don’t foget the dip to make the Superbowl party more super!”
That is no good.!
“The Eagles are going to the Superbowl after they beat the Falcons…”
That is ok.
“Grab some Miller Lite for the Superbowl and get your free Super Pack today”
That is ok, because Lite is the “Official Beer of Superbowl XXXIX”
Oh, decidedly, yes! The aforementioned Miller Beer is one such party. I couldn’t turn up a list of authorized sponsors in a quick search, but I feel safe in guessing that the annual revenue in such deals is in the eight- or nine-figure range.
Certainly, small local businesses and businesses whose products connect only marginally with the game don’t find it worthwhile to pay the licensing fee. But that doesn’t mean the NFL should just let them go ahead and use the name. Once they do that, it devalues the trademark for the big national corporations that are willing to pay.
And, there’s more involved than just licensing fees. If you don’t protect trademarks like “Super Bowl” or “Olympics”, people start using them willy-nilly in all sorts of ways the owner never intended. Pretty soon you have the Thunderdome Arena Super Bowl of Rock and Roll and the Joe’s Bar and Grill Hot Babe Bikini Olympics. People start thinking of “Super Bowl” as code for any sort of over-hyped event, and not as a particular football game. Eventually the phrase would pass into the public domain, and the NFL would have lost a valuable property.
Dammit! dammmit! dammit!
apparently you can’t