How much should Texas A&M charge the Seahawks so they can renew the ability to use the 12th man

[BoBlake]

How much does a team make in Jersey sales as a percent of the sales price of each Jersey sold?

I really have no clue but the article said that "The 12 Jersey" ranked 15th or so in all NFL jerey sales. This means many Seattle fans are spending money on Jerseys and are able to do so because of the agreement with Texas A&M.

I have no idea how many Jerseys need to be sold to rank 15th in the NFL but maybe a way to get an agreement done with Texas A&M would be to give Texas A&M a percent of all the Jersey sales like 5 or10% or whatever could be agreed upon. Right now the billionaire owner is able to pocket profits from the sale of the 12th Man jersey and not reimburse the institute that gave him the ability to do so fairly.

This is simply UNTRUE. It doesn't say "12th Man" on the jersey, therefore Texas A&M has NO legal basis to make a claim on profits.

For example, Texas A&M in their agreement with Seattle, does not allow the Seahawks to sell any 12th man merchandise. So, in the eyes of TA&M the 12 Jersey does not equal 12th Man merchandise.

Thousands of dollars at stake as Texas A&M, Seahawks renegotiate 12th Man licensing agreement | Dallas Morning News

 

[WizardHawk]

How much does a team make in Jersey sales as a percent of the sales price of each Jersey sold?

I really have no clue but the article said that "The 12 Jersey" ranked 15th or so in all NFL jerey sales. This means many Seattle fans are spending money on Jerseys and are able to do so because of the agreement with Texas A&M.

I have no idea how many Jerseys need to be sold to rank 15th in the NFL but maybe a way to get an agreement done with Texas A&M would be to give Texas A&M a percent of all the Jersey sales like 5 or10% or whatever could be agreed upon. Right now the billionaire owner is able to pocket profits from the sale of the 12th Man jersey and not reimburse the institute that gave him the ability to do so fairly.

There are no jerseys that say '12th man' on them, or if there are they are counterfeit. As part of the agreement Seattle is not allowed to sell anything with that term on it at all. So we've had to adjust our tradition to accommodate the asinine trademark to being with. Seattle retired the #12 in honor of our fans in 1984. 6 years before the trademark. And it's not like they retired it that year as a new thing the team was doing. We were the 12th man as far back as the team existed. And were not the only NFL team using that term back then.

 

[BoBlake]

Here's some more information that includes the exact text of the agreement.

It also states that the $5000 that Seattle pays each year is to allow TA&M to recoup the costs of enforcing the licensing agreement (i.e. pay for employees of TA&M and their lawyers to police the stadium and Seahawks official websites). (Under PAYMENT section).

"12th Man" - Inside Texas A&M'''s License Agreement with the Seattle Seahawks - Good Bull Hunting

 

[fordman84]

Dead wrong. 12th man wasn't invented by TAMU was it? You know it, I know it, the world knows it. That 'term' was used before your school's first record of it as far back as the single digit 1900's by Minnesota and a few years later by Iowa State I believe.

So TAMU didn't create or even become the first to use it to describe it's fans impact on games. That's a major problem for your case.

Comparing teams usage of their names vs the trademarking of a common word is ludicrous. The term 12th man is used in Soccer world wide (mainly Europe) because Soccer also has 11 players on the pitch at once. There are 6th man and other variations used in other sports.

Your comparison would only be valid if Seattle was trying to call themselves the Aggies. I dare you to find any other sports team that was using Seahawks before Seattle did. And since they came into the league there were high schools that ended up using it and I'm sure still do. You don't see them bullying them into paying for it.


Give me an example of a trademark Seattle took out on a generic term they didn't invent and try to bully people that were using it long before that trademark and I'd be happy to disavow it. Good luck on that though. Doubt you will have any luck.


The meaning of the 12th man for the aggies and the Seahawks are quite different. The traditions behind it are night and day different. The traditions in the stands are entirely different. Both lump those as what it means to be a 12th man. Hell, I don't know anyone up here that calls themselves a 12th man, we are simply a 12 or the 12's. PERIOD. Trademark "home of the 12th man" as a phrase. No problem with that. It means something special and is a phrase that has been used for a long time. But taking just '12th man' when it is a generic term that has been used by many teams across many sports since long before your team ever used it is fucking crazy.



I don't care about the payment part. I said that's of no consequence. It's the principle of the thing. It is about it not being a trademark worthy term IMO. It's about the stupidity of the rest of the terms like not being able to sell their merchandise in other areas of the country. In fact they aren't allowed to sell anything with 12th man actually on it. I believe the agreement only allowed them to use it within the stadium.

Funny though, they interviewed a group of TAMU grads that are also Seahawk fans that meet in a local bar for games up here and none of them agree with you.

Who cares if A&M invented it? Did Mcdonalds invent the phrase "I'm lovin it"? No, but try using it without their permission. Invention has literally nothing to do with trademark. I have no problem with my case, you do. I have the legal backing of the courts as well as the legally binding agreement your team made stating that A&M owns the 12th Man term.

You consider A&M "bullying" Seattle, when it was Seattle that took something they didn't have the rights to and profit from it. Give me a break.

 

[BoBlake]

....when it was Seattle that took something they didn't have the rights to and profit from it. Give me a break.

First, I'd argue that the "rights" were given incorrectly in this case. It's not unheard of, trademarks are rescinded all the time and absurd trademarks are given all the time.

Second, I'd argue that Seattle took nothing of TA&M's tradition. The used a phrase that IS common among all team sports in 1 form or another (6th man, etc) and used it for at least a decade before any "legal" rights existed. Seattle and TA&M's traditions are nothing alike.

 

[BoBlake]

...as well as the legally binding agreement your team made stating that A&M owns the 12th Man term.

LOL...this is funny fordman. Your team has an approved trademark from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the license agreement (linked above) says the following:

[Seattle Seahawks] agreed to acknowledge [Texas A&M University]'s ownership of the mark 12th MAN

It only acknowledged that the trademark was given to Texas A&M, which is indisputable, as there is indeed a trademark owned by TA&M.

I'm not sure what is so important about this point.

 

[WizardHawk]

Who cares if A&M invented it? Did Mcdonalds invent the phrase "I'm lovin it"? No, but try using it without their permission. Invention has literally nothing to do with trademark. I have no problem with my case, you do. I have the legal backing of the courts as well as the legally binding agreement your team made stating that A&M owns the 12th Man term.

You consider A&M "bullying" Seattle, when it was Seattle that took something they didn't have the rights to and profit from it. Give me a break.

Trademarked in 1990. #12 retired in 1984. Took something that didn't belong to them?

Sorry, you are entirely, thoroughly, and completely wrong. It was used by many teams across several sports before that trademark. It is no more a unique phrase than 19th hole, or 11th frame as names for restaurants at golf courses and bowling alleys.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Sorry Wiz, but this is total bullshit. Unless you also have an issue with your team trademarking the seahawk logo or the name "Seahawks", then you just sound like sour grapes. Your team didn't invent a picture of a seahawk, nor did they invent the word "seahawk". You have no issues with that, but you do with A&M for trademarking 12th man.

A&M sued to protect their trademark. They are charging for it because they can.

Could start pushing them to use t12th man and charge it as a SportsHoopla trademark

 

[fordman84]

First, I'd argue that the "rights" were given incorrectly in this case. It's not unheard of, trademarks are rescinded all the time and absurd trademarks are given all the time.

Second, I'd argue that Seattle took nothing of TA&M's tradition. The used a phrase that IS common among all team sports in 1 form or another (6th man, etc) and used it for at least a decade before any "legal" rights existed. Seattle and TA&M's traditions are nothing alike.

Argue all you want, the two sides agreed that my stance is correct.

 

[BoBlake]

Did Mcdonalds invent the phrase "I'm lovin it"? No, but try using it without their permission.

Somebody better tell Justin Timberlake.

 

[fordman84]

Trademarked in 1990. #12 retired in 1984. Took something that didn't belong to them?

Sorry, you are entirely, thoroughly, and completely wrong. It was used by many teams across several sports before that trademark. It is no more a unique phrase than 19th hole, or 11th frame as names for restaurants at golf courses and bowling alleys.

As you and other SEA fans have pointed out "#12" is not the same thing as "12th Man". That has been claimed up and down this entire thread.

You can keep saying I'm wrong, but the Trademark is A&M's. Seattle agreed to that. Seattle entered into a settlement to keep using something.

So keep telling me I'm wrong if you must, but I'm not.

 

[WizardHawk]

Argue all you want, the two sides agreed that my stance is correct.

So paying off is the same as agreeing now?

You are so full of it.

There is a difference between morally, ethically, and legally right. Often the latter fails to include either of the former.

 

[fordman84]

Somebody better tell Justin Timberlake.

Justin Timberlake - I'm Lovin' It - YouTube

And that's a real company trying to make a profit?

 

[flyerhawk]

And that's a real company trying to make a profit?

Pretty sure that Justin Timberlake and his label are making money off the song.

 

[WizardHawk]

As you and other SEA fans have pointed out "#12" is not the same thing as "12th Man". That has been claimed up and down this entire thread.

You can keep saying I'm wrong, but the Trademark is A&M's. Seattle agreed to that. Seattle entered into a settlement to keep using something.

So keep telling me I'm wrong if you must, but I'm not.

I will keep telling you are wrong when you claim something was taken that didn't belong to us because that is factually incorrect. You can keep claiming otherwise, but that won't suddenly make it true. The facts clearly support my statements. You cannot deny that phrase was used by many schools before yours, and in the years after they adopted it. It wasn't copied from you if you didn't create it. Just a fact.

 

[BoBlake]

Argue all you want, the two sides agreed that my stance is correct.

I guess they did, as so far as "settling out of court" constitutes an agreement.

I'm mildly curious what Seattle chooses to do next. I'm hoping they just forget the 12th Man phrase entirely and leave Texas A&M to do whatever a mid-ranked school does.

If they choose to challenge the trademark, I'd be interested in that too, however.

 

[fordman84]

So paying off is the same as agreeing now?

You are so full of it.

There is a difference between morally, ethically, and legally right. Often the latter fails to include either of the former.

paying off? They entered into a contract to use something that A&M owns. It's no different than paying rent for an apartment.

 

[fordman84]

Pretty sure that Justin Timberlake and his label are making money off the song.

Then I guess it's up to McD's to go after him or have an agreement.

 

[flyerhawk]

As you and other SEA fans have pointed out "#12" is not the same thing as "12th Man". That has been claimed up and down this entire thread.

You can keep saying I'm wrong, but the Trademark is A&M's. Seattle agreed to that. Seattle entered into a settlement to keep using something.

So keep telling me I'm wrong if you must, but I'm not.

I think you are making way too much of a meal out of this.

The Seahawks give A&M a few thousands dollars for rights to the term 12th Man probably because they don't want to deal with annoyance lawsuits from A&M.

Ultimately it isn't worth their time to challenge A&M over copyright. They can still sell all sorts of stuff that references the 12th man even if it doesn't explicitly say 12th man.

Ultimately it annoys me that these sort of copyrights exist but I don't really care that much.

 

[BoBlake]

And that's a real company trying to make a profit?

Actually, I guess McDonalds filed the trademark AFTER the Timberlake song. Sort of like how Texas A&M filed the trademark for 12th Man AFTER many other schools/sports had used it.

Sneaky sneaky.