MLB Philadelphia suing Phanatic mascot to prevent free agency UPD settlement reached
- Thread starter LadyStanley
- Start date
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
Hard to say which side is in the right from a legal standpoint, but it's strange to imagine a world where a team's mascot is now a "free agent" being marketed around the country by a design firm. Pretty much defeats the whole purpose of having a mascot in the first place.
tony d
Registered User
b1e9a8r5s
Registered User
I thought for sure that this was going to be a spoof video or onion type story.
They both need to settle. The Phanatic can't go to another team.
They both need to settle. The Phanatic can't go to another team.
Yeah, who does he think he is, the San Diego Chicken?
David Dennison
I'm a tariff, man.
Gritty needs to pelt the Phanatic with batteries when he returns with another team.
TheLegend
Megathread Gadfly
That was slightly different in the The Chicken was originally the brain child of a local radio station KGB who ran around all the San Diego sporting events to promote the station.
The character had become so popular in such a short time a rift developed between the man who played The Chicken (Ted Giannuolas) and the station over where he could appear.
So Giannuolas changed the outfit enough to avoid a copyright infringement and the name to The Famous Chicken.
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
Only observation comes in form of question.
Did Phillies pay the NY firm to create him?
If so I think it could be a short court case.
If he was created independently of Phillies they will lose.
One example is an artist named Riggs who created Eddie for Iron Maiden. He tried suing the band for Eddie's rights but because Maiden paid for the creation they had the rights.
Depends on what was in the creation agreement of the Phanatic. I could be wrong but I believe the phillies incorporated his name and looks and paid for his creation.
Did Phillies pay the NY firm to create him?
If so I think it could be a short court case.
If he was created independently of Phillies they will lose.
One example is an artist named Riggs who created Eddie for Iron Maiden. He tried suing the band for Eddie's rights but because Maiden paid for the creation they had the rights.
Depends on what was in the creation agreement of the Phanatic. I could be wrong but I believe the phillies incorporated his name and looks and paid for his creation.
TheLegend
Megathread Gadfly
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
If that is correct it will be a quick case. In this day and age copywrite is king. By owning the copywrite the owners can pretty much do what they want with the character and prevent others from using it. As long they paid the required fee that is. That is why there are good movies on YouTube copywrites were not renewed
LadyStanley
Registered User
Clock ticking on the Phanatic, lawsuit over mascot's future...
Paywall. Things heating up with mascot copyright expiration in June and training camp around the corner.
Puppeteers have subpoenaed MLB Properties for merchandise sales records, and MLBP has objected to subpoena, not providing information requested. Team would like to continue to sell Phanatic merchandise.
Paywall. Things heating up with mascot copyright expiration in June and training camp around the corner.
Puppeteers have subpoenaed MLB Properties for merchandise sales records, and MLBP has objected to subpoena, not providing information requested. Team would like to continue to sell Phanatic merchandise.
TheLegend
Megathread Gadfly
Phillies are hedging their bet.... introduced a modified Phanatic costume this last week.
Phillie Phanatic debuts his new look: Wings, a tail, and a bigger backside
Phillie Phanatic debuts his new look: Wings, a tail, and a bigger backside
LadyStanley
Registered User
LadyStanley
Registered User
Phillies settle Phanatic lawsuit, team can use new version of famous mascot
Paywall. Settlement reached, terms not disclosed. Judge ruled that team modification enough different that it was not copyright infringement. Settlement means team can use new version. But nothing said about original version.
Paywall. Settlement reached, terms not disclosed. Judge ruled that team modification enough different that it was not copyright infringement. Settlement means team can use new version. But nothing said about original version.
