By Leticia R. Halas
In 2009, Jay-Z claimed that he “made the Yankee hat more famous than a Yankee can.” Then in 2010, the hip-hop mogul and the New York Yankees partnered to sell co-branded merchandise. After launching sports management company, Roc Nation Sports in April 2013, he signed his first client, second baseman Robinson Cano of the Yankees. Forbes Magazine recently named Jay-Z the second wealthiest hip-hop artist, with a net worth of over $450 million. His character radiates success, entrepreneurship, and style.
Undeniably, the Yankees appreciate the marketing benefits they receive from Jay-Z’s association with the team. However, a team’s brand not only requires marketing — it needs protection. Representatives from several professional sports teams in California discussed how they tackle licensing and brand issues at a recent sports law symposium that was staged by the Stanford Law School.
“There are rich teams and there are poor teams. Then there’s 50 feet of crap. And then there’s us.”
— Billy Bean, Moneyball.
When the Oakland A’s were approached prior to the production of the movie Moneyball, there were concerns about how the team would be portrayed. To avoid portrayals which could negatively impact the team, the A’s were entitled to some script review. The team’s Senior Counsel, Ryan Horning explained they “had say” in the way the brand was used in the creation of new content. In order to create the movie however, a myriad of different licenses had to be granted. At issue were rights to historical content, rights to film at the Coliseum which is owned by the City of Oakland and the County of Alameda, rights to other teams’ logos, and rights to Major League Baseball Properties. The deal went through as an entire package because the focus was on the league at large. That said, Mr. Horning felt that the team was depicted in favorable manner. Ultimately, the publicity the A’s received was extremely positive and both the fans and sponsors loved the movie.
On the other hand, some professional sports teams struggle to get their brand in the public eye. For example, The San Jose Sharks’ policies about uploading game content are fairly relaxed because the National Hockey League is under-televised in comparison to other professional sports leagues. Executive Vice President and General Counsel of the Sharks, John Tortora explained that the team benefits when fans upload content on YouTube because hockey games can reach a wider fan base. Additionally, The San Francisco 49ers were one of the first teams to have their own YouTube channel. Yet once the National Football League became aware of the channel, they aggressively fought to have the channel suspended. The professional sports leagues across the country take licensing and copyright very seriously and actively attempt to enforce against infringement.
The use of a team’s brand or logo are daily in-house deliberations for professional sports leagues. It boils down to how the brand is being used for and who is attempting to use it. The primary concerns are whether the brand will be used to generate revenue or whether it will be for personal use. While teams can grant exceptions to individuals who aim to use the brand for personal use, that use must not run afoul with sponsors. The Sharks denied one individual’s request to use the Shark’s logo on his truck. They did so because the individual wished to name his truck “The Shark Tank.” As Sharks fans recognize, “The Shark Tank” is a nickname given to their home ice rink. However the Sharks’ home arena was named HP Pavilion in a $47 million contract with Hewlett Packard in 2001. Such a popular nickname diminishes the value of the naming rights. Interestingly enough, in March 2013, it was reported that Hewlett Packard’s CEO, Meg Whitman wished to terminate the naming rights contract early.
Sometimes a team will see nothing wrong with the use of its brand or logo without a license — especially when the promotion is positive. The ma and pa convenient stores of San Francisco that display The San Francisco Giants logo on their storefronts are not exactly high priority targets for infringement cases, nor are those that tattoo The Oakland Raiders logo on their bodies. In some situations, the law is slightly ignored but not at high cost. When the use of a team’s brand or logo could or will have adverse effects is when enforcement of the law is warranted.
