The National Football League and the Baltimore Ravens have asked the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a district court’s ruling in the long-running copyright dispute with Franklin Bouchat, who created a drawing that was ultimately used by the Ravens for a period of time as a logo.
In the December 2012 ruling, the district judge denied Bouchat’s request for a permanent injunction preventing its further use, but required the Ravens to pay the artist “reasonable compensation for such use.” The judge set the royalties at a one-time fee of $721.65 for all future sales of highlight reels and $100 for each clip shown at future Ravens home games.
The origins of the dispute go back almost 20 years when, on December 5, 1995, Bouchat entered a contest to develop a logo for the fledgling franchise. Several months later, his logo was “officially chosen” and outside artists were hired to apply the finishing touches. On April 1, 1996, Bouchat faxed his drawing to Ravens management and asked for a letter of recognition and an autographed helmet.
In June of 1996, the NFL began licensing the logo for the creation of merchandise. A month later, Bouchat registered his drawing with the U.S. Copyright Office. In 1999, The Ravens began using a different logo.
In May of 2007, Bouchat filed a copyright infringement action against the Ravens and the NFL in federal court. The district court ruled, and 4th U. S Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, that Bouchat was barred from obtaining actual damages from the licensees by the Doctrine of Claim Preclusion, and that he was ineligible to receive statutory damages because of his failure to register his copyright before the infringement began.
Bouchat then embraced a different strategy. On February 14, 2008, he sued the Ravens again, as well as the National Football League, NFL Films, Inc., and others, alleging that the defendants have and continue to sell, distribute, and publicly display the old “Shield B” logo in connection with season highlight films, promotional films shown at Ravens games, team game films, memorabilia, photographs, and websites. Among other things, Bouchat sought a permanent injunction regarding the future use of the logo.
In their most recent appeal, the Ravens and NFL argued that the “reasonable compensation” awarded to Bouchat was unprecedented because Bouchat was only seeking an injunction, not royalties. They further claimed that the injunction, triggered by the non-payment of royalties that weren’t requested, is something new to copyright law.
“It is well-settled that before a court can calculate a hypothetical royalty rate… ,”the copyright holder must demonstrate the design’s fair market value, argued the league and the franchise. Further, they alleged that the judge came to the compensation figure by relying on “hypothetical negotiations between the parties.”
