A spokeswoman for the baseball team said there was “no proof” of the woman’s claim. “This is a wonderful country,” said [Alice] McGillion, “where anybody can sue for anything, even when the allegations are over 70 years old.” [NY Post] More: Unbeige (on possible evidence for claim).
Also on sports logo law: “Can I legally get myself tattooed with a pro sports team’s logo?” [Cecil Adams, The Straight Dope]
5 Comments
Preposterous! Proof or otherwise.
There ought to be a law.
None of the articles on this case are clear about exactly what sort of legal claim is being made. The only one I can think of that might make any sense would be a copyright extension-term reclamation, as permitted by the law at various points in the lifespan of a copyright, in which the original creator of something revokes an earlier license of the copyright to somebody else. One of the times when this can happen is at the 75th year of a pre-1978 copyright, when the extended 20 year term added in a subsequent law would kick in; that would be right about now for a 1936 copyright. This would, however, depend on the author having a valid copyright that began in 1936 and remains in effect, and a valid assignment of copyright to the Yankees; I gather the team is denying the artist ever had those rights in the first place, and in the absence of a copyright registration I’m not sure they’d exist for a copyright from the era when such formalities were required. On the other hand, it is claimed that the artist was a non-American at the time, and there are special provisions as a result of treaty obligations that have allowed the restoration of copyrights on foreign works that had lapsed. So it could get complicated.
Unpublished work. Complaint here.
And no one noticed for eighty-five years?
Bob
The uncle ripped off the design from the 94th Fighter Squadron emblem made famous by Capt. Eddie Rickenbacker in WWI.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/94th_Fighter_Squadron
If anybody, the USAF should be suing.