You MLS types will love this. His nightly 'word' segment was on Major League Baseball and a copyright lawsuit theyve brought against a Chicago little league with team names copying major league teams. No logos or anything was copied. Just the names. Anyway he made a very constructed joke about paying people for their intellectual property and no referencing something unless you have the expressed written consent and said from now on he will refer to MLB as something else, 'like the NBA'. At the end he wrapped it up by saying it was okay because American kids will find something else to do with their time. In the 'word' box to the side of the screen was the word 'soccer'.
I was already pleased with his "Carolina Coach is taking us out for ice Cream after the game" joke. He always tried to mention South Carolina on the show whenever he can (him being from Charleston, SC). Then, hearing the end joke about soccer just put the icing on the cake.
What would've been funnier (and staying in tune with the gag) would've been instead of soccer, it said "That game David Beckham plays" .
I watch the Colbert Report every night because I think the man is hilarious. I have 2 shirts, a poster, and I bought his book. Anyways, the "word" segement was hilarious but I wasnt sure if he was trying to poke fun at soccer when I saw that.
actually... the MLS has similar rules about the use of team names. No obvious evidence that that have ever done anything to insist that teams stop, but the rule is there. Did'nt Notre Dame go after another college or hs because they violated the use of a leprechaun as a mascot?
Well kids have always played soccer in high numbers for a few decades now. I think it was a joke, as the words and phrases appearing in the Word column are used as sarcasm. Doesn't mean he was bashing soccer, I just don't think he should be hailed as a soccer hero.
i think the word "soccer" was a sarcastic way of highlighting the way soccer is taking off with the youth and baseball is in a fight to bring the game back to the innercity and the youth in general.there was a show about that not long ago pointing out how MLB is losing out in certain demographics.i think the soccer reference was showing how MLB is allienating kids from the game by sueing over the use of names. I grew up in the 70;s and 80's and every little league i played in had teams with major league names and logos........or at least names. soccer is making a dent in the youth.with the emergence of MLS kids playing at youth levels have something to dream about now.With people like Becks and Blanco kids have someone they can go and watch in person and aspire to be like.....this is why MLS and its success is very important.. i have a kid brother that grew up in texas as a r eally gifted soccer player.His dad[my stepdad]played in england as a youth.actually signed with Brentford for a few seasons before moving to america.My brother was on elite teams in texas and eventually olympic development teams.when he hit ninth grade he switched to football and became a place kicker.He ended up getting a full scholarship to USC and played there.He now has graduated and lives in Texas and plays on a first division amateur team in Dallas .He recently told me he wished he would have stayed with soccer but chose football because of all of the hype surrounding it .It seemed more like a real sport to others and that mindset is real amongst people all over the country.but now MLS has become more and more visible and credible with the youth so our good athletes who play soccer for a few years and then switch to a sport they think will bring them more money glory or whatever ,now will stay with soccer because they can see that it s getting more and more Major league or bigtime as they might say.When this occurs look out because America has some of the best all around athletes in the world and one day when the Lebron James' and Reggie Bush's of the world start staying with soccer instead of switching sports ,the US will be a world force in soccer.I dont know how long that will take but progress is being made and one day we will see it.And it all starts with MLS being successful. sorry i went off ,but im inspired and happy that soccer is making its mark and will one day be one of the major sports in the professional ranks in the US.
This has to be the most ridiculous thing that intellectual copyright holders try to defend. I can sort of see defending it if a little league team tries to sell merchandise that has the teams' official logos or colors on it, but busting them for simply using the name for a U-10 soccer team that doesn't even wear the same colors as the real club? Let it go. They're losing out on a great branding opportunity with the young people by being stingy on that. What kid on the U-8 Dynamo wouldn't love to see Houston play on TV and say to his friends, "Hey, that's my team!" You've got an instant fan and a possible future customer as well.
I'm waiting for the day when the SF Giants sue the NY Giants (likewise, the SL Cardinals can sue the Arizona Cardinals)
And it's not just MLS. Just the sheer amount of soccer available to watch on TV now is a huge factor. In my heyday in the mid-80s, there was very little soccer to be watched. We had one of the big satellite dishes and even then it was the occasional FMF game or some WC 1986 games in Spanish on Univision, so I was one of the luckier ones. Still, I wish I had the great amount of games to watch back then -- now that I've hung up the boots -- because I've learned so much by watching so much soccer that would have benefitted me back then on the field. I think another thing is the nature of the game itself. With attention spans getting shorter and shorter, I don't know if as many young kids would bother sitting through a baseball telecast like we did as kids. But soccer is compact, two hours long, with constant action and no commercial breaks. It seems tailor made for this generation.
Not disagreeing soccer is making a niche for itself here but I think people are making a big deal out of a couple seconds of a show that was meant as a joke. It seems whenever there is a non derogatory mention of soccer these threads light up as if it was the second coming of Christ.
Unfortunately, it's not. Without rigorously defending a copyright, an entity risks losing it to the public domain. Basically, if they allow some Little League kids to use it without making a stink, they risk other enities from doing so and basically saying "you gave up your exclusive copyright when you allowed that kids team to use the name". That's a huge risk to take given that the team names have multi-million (billion?) dollar value to those clubs. That said, they can easily "lease" use of the names to the league under some specific guidelines for some token sum ($1 a year or somesuch). That avoids the legal pitfalls and is a show of good faith. I wouldn't be surprised if somethin like that is the eventual outcome.
It has to be. I played T-Ball and we were the Angels. That was first year of sports then swithed to soccer from there on out. Thats 20+ career for some mathmaticians! Alot of teams had MLB names. Just not the city taglines. Maybe they forgot to renew there cirtificate of rights with all membership money. Then MLB just took formal letigations to relax its hold on couple G's maximum. Or there could've been some law suit which stated no team from there on out could use the tagline with colors! Bwahahahahahahhahahaha!
What if an MLS club were to choose "Tigers" as their mascot? Then which sports team would sue them, or would it be a class-action lawsuit?
Wrong. Technique makes world class players and forces in world soccer. Athletic ability can mask skill at lower levels but once you're talking about world class increased skill levels are vital. You will have to change the youth system to become a force, but you will one day.
I agree with your point, but where is the line drawn as far as a generic word vs. trademark? Does a U10 team called the Wizards get a cease-and-desist from Kansas City or Washington? Or maybe from J.K. Rowling? Could they not structure their copyright so that they could defend it under certain circumstances? Right now the rec league I coach in uses team names such as United, Wizards, Galaxy, Sting (old school ), Rockets and even Power Rangers (definitely not a generic term.) They don't wear licensed replica unis and even the team colors don't match the pro clubs. Are they hurting the brands by doing this or helping them? Would those fall under fair use, especially if no income was being derived from their use? Charging some low cost, good faith licensing fee is a great solution, but going after these teams for something like that might be hurting a future fan base, IMO.
wow, the whole intellectual property thing is total bull*****, if you want a real example of how intellectual property "sharing" has worked look at all the college sports programs and how many have tigers, wildcats, spartans, huskies, etc etc? how many have the mascot "hokies"? that's right, just 1!!! and we have rights to it, cuz its damn unique, gobble gobble bitch same name, different colors, no one cares, and so should be the case with MLB, and hopefully MLS, i know MLB hasn't been raking in the dough recently, but its a slap in the face to the little leagues where the MLB's fans come from