Licensing question

[jchem1995]

Its been this way for awhile BDYZR. I tried getting my son'e little league to be the Bulls and the board said no because of licencing.

[Brad]

https://www.clc.com/

[206BULL]

8 minutes ago, Brad said:

https://www.clc.com/

If you type USF in the search bar only we show up none of the other USF impersonators do. Gotta love that, the collegiate licensing company knows the truth!

Edited April 24, 2017 by 206BULL

[Mike Stuben]

It doesn't have anything to do with Under Armour.... CLC and USF work together to set up fees to make USF items for resale. It works something like this. Company X wants to make USF widgets. Company X must pay an upfront fee to get the right (let's say $1000 - I think that is about right) then offer USF a royalty on each item (lets say 6% of the wholesale costs). So, to get the right, you have to plan to make a lot to make it worthwhile. 

USF will at times grant a limited rights for a set product or short duration where the up front fee is reduced (lets say $50 instead of $1000) ... the royalty never changes. But this only happens if USF really wants to see the product hit the market, not just because someone asks. 

Ironically, this is something I dealt with when I worked in Athletics (I ran the merchandise at games for a couple years) and something I deal with now, working with the Student Government funded sports clubs. My dollars and royalty percentage might be off, but the concept I am pretty confident. 

[Ionbull]

59 minutes ago, Mike Stuben said:

It doesn't have anything to do with Under Armour.... CLC and USF work together to set up fees to make USF items for resale. It works something like this. Company X wants to make USF widgets. Company X must pay an upfront fee to get the right (let's say $1000 - I think that is about right) then offer USF a royalty on each item (lets say 6% of the wholesale costs). So, to get the right, you have to plan to make a lot to make it worthwhile. 

USF will at times grant a limited rights for a set product or short duration where the up front fee is reduced (lets say $50 instead of $1000) ... the royalty never changes. But this only happens if USF really wants to see the product hit the market, not just because someone asks. 

Ironically, this is something I dealt with when I worked in Athletics (I ran the merchandise at games for a couple years) and something I deal with now, working with the Student Government funded sports clubs. My dollars and royalty percentage might be off, but the concept I am pretty confident. 

So if I wanted to make and paint USF corn hole boards with the iconic U and sell it on etsy, I'd have to do that? I get merchandisers;  just strange that arts festival hobbyists are treated the same, but I suppose it's reassuring the brand doesn't get tarnished in some way.

Edited April 25, 2017 by Ionbull

[Mike Stuben]

3 minutes ago, Ionbull said:

So if I wanted to make and paint USF corn hole boards with the iconic U and sell it on etsy, I'd have to do that? I get merchandisers;  just strange that arts festival hobbyists are treated the same, but I suppose it's reassuring the brand doesn't get tarnished in some way.

The answer is yes, but those hand painted corn hole boards are a good contender for the lower upfront fee. 

One thing I left off, artwork for each design must be submitted for approval. Meaning that if you see it in a store, USF and/or CLC approved that specific design (or a vendor made something in violation). I know USF has a person who reviews, and CLC adds their suggestion. I don't know if the USF person gets every design or if CLC can approve some simple uses (like the logo on a hat). 

[Brad]

And they will shut you down through Etsy or whatever the means is.  

[BDYZR]

8 hours ago, Mike Stuben said:

It doesn't have anything to do with Under Armour.... CLC and USF work together to set up fees to make USF items for resale. It works something like this. Company X wants to make USF widgets. Company X must pay an upfront fee to get the right (let's say $1000 - I think that is about right) then offer USF a royalty on each item (lets say 6% of the wholesale costs). So, to get the right, you have to plan to make a lot to make it worthwhile. 

USF will at times grant a limited rights for a set product or short duration where the up front fee is reduced (lets say $50 instead of $1000) ... the royalty never changes. But this only happens if USF really wants to see the product hit the market, not just because someone asks. 

Ironically, this is something I dealt with when I worked in Athletics (I ran the merchandise at games for a couple years) and something I deal with now, working with the Student Government funded sports clubs. My dollars and royalty percentage might be off, but the concept I am pretty confident. 

So USF, unlike a hundred other universities, thinks that few dollars is better than the free advertisement?  

 

[ToroDeFuego]

8 hours ago, Ionbull said:

So if I wanted to make and paint USF corn hole boards with the iconic U and sell it on etsy, I'd have to do that? I get merchandisers;  just strange that arts festival hobbyists are treated the same, but I suppose it's reassuring the brand doesn't get tarnished in some way.

This is a good point and reminds be of a few years back when Ubuntu went after a lot of sites for using their logo. They argued that if they didn't aggressively enforce their logo/trademark they would lose it. Others argued that this was not the case. Maybe USF sees it that way.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/trademark-law-does-not-require-companies-tirelessly-censor-internet

[Mike Stuben]

2 hours ago, BDYZR said:

So USF, unlike a hundred other universities, thinks that few dollars is better than the free advertisement?  

 

Not sure I agree with that. Every school wants to make sure that their logo is protected and that they receive royalties off of it. I don't think it is fair to sit back here and make a blanket statement that implies that USF is doing something wrong "unlike a hundred other universities" CLC who looks out for USF's best interest is the industry leader, they treat USF just like they treat their hundred-plus other division 1 clients. The people making these decisions are very smart and have to balance between getting USF products into the marketplace and maximizing revenue and protecting the brand. Without a lot more information, it isn't fair to say USF is doing it wrong because of the lack of do-hickeys at a flea market. Respectfully, I think a lot of times people post with emotion and know a percentage of the facts but never consider what they don't know and how it might impact reality.