NEWS
Nike jumps at chance to dismiss Michael Jordan lawsuit
Sportswear brand Nike has claimed that a lawsuit in which its basketball-themed range was accused of using a copyright-protected image of Michael Jordan is “meritless”. In a motion to dismiss, Nike has claimed the initial complaint by photographer
that
Jacobus Rentmeester presents “exactly the sort of meritless case” that motions to dismiss are intended to address. Rentmeester filed a complaint against Nike
in January this year, seeking damages, profits generated from the image’s use and an injunction preventing further alleged infringement. Te image in question, which Rentmeester
claimed he staged and shot for US magazine Life as part of a special edition for the 1984 Summer Olympics, shows former basketball star Michael Jordan leaping through the air. In his initial complaint, filed at the US District
Court for the District of Oregon, Rentmeester claimed that
later that year Nike paid him
$15,000 for a limited licence to use the image for two years but continued to reproduce the photo aſter that two-year period elapsed. Nike went on to create the ‘Jumpman’ logo, a
silhouette of the leaping Jordan allegedly inspired by the photograph, and subsequently launched the Jordan Brand division, which markets Michael Jordan products using the picture. In its motion to dismiss, filed at the same court,
Nike said the law is “clear” that infringement can only occur where “two photographs of the same subject are virtually identical”. Te motion added: “Rentmeester falls far short
of that standard here given the significant—and self-evident—differences in the mood, lighting, setting, expression, colour, style and overall look and feel of his photograph.” Nike also criticised the decision of Rentmeester
to wait “decades” before filing the lawsuit. “Rentmeester does not have a monopoly on
Jordan, his appearance, his athletic prowess, or images of him dunking a basketball,” the motion added. Rentmeester could not be contacted for
comment. 8 World Intellectual Property Review May/June 2015
www.worldipreview.com
Multitel /
Shutterstock.com
©
iStockphoto.com / doram
NEWS
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100