Advertisement
Larry Sinks, owner of Joe College, with benefit organizer Hollie Farrahi.
Advertisement
Past Event
Joe College Jamfest: Benefit Show All Proceeds go to Keep Joe College T-Shirt Store Open
- Thursday, January 21, 2010, 9 p.m.
- Granada, 1020 Mass., Lawrence
- All ages / $10
A customer looks through the T-shirts at Joe College.
The ongoing saga of Joe College vs. the Kansas University Athletic Department has spilled into a new decade, with no end in sight. It's hard to believe that a legal tussle regarding inane T-shirts, waged between a downtown retailer and a higher education institution, has dragged on for this many years and with so many hundreds of thousands of dollars at stake.
The controversy will be reignited this week with the Joe College Jamfest, a student-organized fundraiser for the T-shirt shop on the brink of collapse due to its trademark war with KU. And it's only the latest chapter in the seemingly never-ending drama.
"I believe I received papers in May of 2006. So it's been going on for four years now," says a visibly weary Larry Sinks, owner of Joe College, who recalls the moment he encountered a message from KU athletic director Lew Perkins that would change his life. "I simply think Mr. Perkins didn't like the shirts. He sent me a letter telling me to close my store, and when I didn't close my store, I think he's used to getting his way."
Thus was born the very serious fight over very silly T-shirts. Joe College had been selling humorous apparel with KU and Lawrence themes - their most popular designs probably being the Mark Mangino baiting "My Coach Can Eat Your Coach" and ubiquitous "Muck Fizzou" shirts - that the university felt were infringing upon their trademarks. Although Sinks says he studiously avoided using a Jayhawk or any variation of an official KU logo, the athletic department still felt the shirts used colors and designs that sullied the university's good name.
"For the life of me, I don't understand how the messages that are on the back of our shirts can be part of a trademark lawsuit," says Sinks. "I mean, 'Friends don't let friends go to school in Missouri' - I don't understand how that's infringing on KU's trademarks. 'Muck Fizzou' - I don't understand how that infringed on KU's trademarks. I looked up those trademarks, and they didn't own them. It's confusing. I'm sure there are reasons for it, but it's just been a really tough time."
A jury ruled in 2008 that Joe College must stop selling 53 of its more than 200 designs and pay KU $127,000 in penalties. In 2009, the judge presiding over the case ruled Sinks and company must also pay KU nearly $550,000 in legal fees. As of right now, attorneys for Joe College have filed an appeal with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, which may not be heard until 2011. In the meantime, Joe College waits in legal limbo, unsure if it will still be in business this time next year.
"The jury unanimously found, on all six counts, that Joe College willfully infringed on KU's marks," says associate athletic director Jim Marchiony, arguing the lawsuit was meant to protect not only the interests of the university, but of its students. "Every unlicensed product that is purchased means that a licensed product is not purchased, and that takes scholarship money away from KU students."
Dividing line
The incident has become a flashpoint in Lawrence, a referendum for some on the tenure of Perkins as AD. There's a dividing line between those who think Perkins is simply protecting KU's interests and those who think he's persecuting a small business owner. Enter Hollie Farrahi, a KU journalism student who decided to use an advertising assignment for class as a way to raise money and awareness for Joe College during its legal battle.
"Honestly, I like to think of Joe College as very quintessentially Lawrence, especially in terms of the college scene," says Farrahi, whose benefit concert tonight at The Granada will raise funds for Sinks. "When we were putting together the campaign, we really wanted to target college students because we obviously know that demographic pretty well. We also like the controversy surrounding it. We thought it would be interesting to give the company a positive spin and a positive voice in the community."
For his part, Sinks was glad to have any sliver of good news.
"Hollie informed me they want to bring attention to what has happened here and try to bring about the freedom of speech where you can print whatever you want on a T-shirt as long as you're not using their actual marks," Sinks says. "She told me there was a group of students on campus that really believe what I'm doing is OK. The students are behind me."
With the Joe College Jamfest, featuring a slate of local bands, Farrahi hopes she can tap into the pro-Joe contingent in Lawrence who believe the university, and particularly Perkins, has been heavy-handed in this dispute.
"I think it's almost a personal attack is what I'd call it," Farrahi says. "There are a lot of details that seem kind of fuzzy to me. I don't want to say, 'Oh, it's not fair.' I don't know 100 percent all of the details, but — it seems a lot of it doesn't add up."
Sinks, unsurprisingly, is of the same mind.
"Lew Perkins and I had some dialogue there for a while — his answer was that it's out of his hands and it's in the hands of the lawyers right now," Sinks says. "I know he's been driving it, but in my conversations I've had with Lew, he's said it's business and nothing personal. Yet they sued me personally. It's affecting my relationship with my wife and it's been hard on my children. It's very personal. I think they're doing everything in their power to close me down. One of my offers to them was to close the store to settle this thing and make it go away. They haven't answered those offers. Their offer was, 'We want to know every dime that you have.'"
Ready for an end
Despite Sinks' assertions, the athletic department insists it never sought a war of legal attrition and that its aim is not to drive Joe College out of business.
"This lawsuit is not something we wanted to happen," Marchiony says. "Larry Sinks had ample opportunity to stop being a willful infringer, but he made the very conscious decision to continue to be a willful infringer, and the jury said so. Our only goal is to have Larry Sinks stop infringing on KU's marks. He can sell T-shirts. He's very, very capable of selling T-shirts that do not willfully infringe on KU's marks."
Farrahi, who insists the fundraiser is not an anti-Perkins-palooza but purely a means to generate positive publicity for Joe College, has nonetheless caught the attention of the athletic department. "I got an e-mail from them. They weren't happy with it, basically. I had some errors in the press release in terms of wording about legal fees versus damages," recalls Farrahi, describing the tone of the e-mail as, "Very rude. It was condescending."
While Sinks is grateful for the support from Farrahi and the community, in the end he just wants this whole affair to go away.
"If you only knew how many people come up to me and say, 'We're proud for what you've stood up for,'" says Sinks with obvious emotion in his voice. "But if I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't even be here. It's not worth what I had to go through with my wife and my kids. The tears at night from my wife several times, some things my kids have been told at school - it's not worth it. Life's too short."
Spring game highlights April 28, 2012
Charlie Weis Jr. helps lead the KU running backs in drills April 19, 2012
D.J. Beshears makes tough catch on deep pass from Dayne Crist April 19, 2012
Behind the Lens: Game Over April 19, 2012
Highlights from Charlie Weis press conference April 10, 2012
Comments
EarthaKitt (anonymous) says…
I hate to be a spoil-sport, but, um, Haiti?
austin5string (anonymous) says…
No kidding, EK.. Let's have the Jamfest support a worthy cause, rather than some sleazebag business owner
gavinesq (anonymous) says…
I'm not saying that Haiti isn't worthwhile (I've already given several significant, to me at least, donations to Haitian relief efforts and haven't ever bought a shirt from Joe College) but to look at this as an effort to support a single business owner is shortsighted. I don't think it's a huge reach to look at this as a First Amendment issue and anyone who says the First Amendment isn't worth protecting wil get a fight from me on that. I realize that Lew Perkins isn't "the state" in this, but he runs a huge corporation and he is using the resources of that huge corpoation to try and sink a small business that he doesn't like because that small business says a few things he thinks are disrespectful in tone. It's a much bigger deal than one guy making t-shirts. If you change the business names in this case to, say, the New York Times and the University Daily Kansan (the Times being the analog of the KUAC and the UDK being Joe College), people would be up in arms about the big bully shoving around a simple little college-oriented business and no one would be upset about a fundraiser to help pay the legal fees for the Kansan, would they?
Just because Haiti is a bigger problem doesn't mean this is NOT a problem. I think Lew Perkins has been a great AD for KU and he has my full support (even where hispolicies have hurt my season ticket placement) except on this. As awesome as he has been, this is proof that nobody is perfect.
d_prowess (anonymous) says…
Direct quote from the student when speaking about the legal situation, "I don't know 100 percent all of the details." So let me get this straight, she is organizing a fundraiser for a business involved in a legal dispute that has already been ruled against once by a jury, yet she doesn't understand all the details of the dispute.
I understand the First Amendment aspect of this case, and there seems to be some merit that not all of what this business does is in violation, but there are definitely shirts that are according to the legal proceedings so far. So I don't understand why so many people are rushing to defend this guy and his shop (well, I actually do; many are just the anti-Perkins crowd willing to support anything that goes against him). And I find him bring in the sympathetic comments about his wife crying at night to just be sleazy. You can't honestly feel that you are not partially to blame for that, sir.
He is totally within his rights to keep fighting in the courts, and if he wins, good for him. But quit playing the martyr card...
chuckberry32 (anonymous) says…
this entire lawsuit is more of a disgrace then having to fire your coach or even basketball fighting football. Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in this country and Lew doesn't have any ground to stand on from my perspective.
I definitely support Joe College.
knayte (anonymous) says…
Yes, chuckberry, freedom of speech is a big part of our society. So is rule of law, which covers things like...y'know...copyright infrigement.
gavinesq (anonymous) says…
Yes, knayte, the rule of law is important in our society. But the Joe College matter and whether he violated any copyrights is on appeal. The First Amendment and whether it still exists is not.
knayte (anonymous) says…
I never said that the First Amendment is on appeal. But there are limits to freedom of speech. That's just a fact.
kuME10 (anonymous) says…
Sinks has been trying to make a living. He has been trying to do it lawfully, by not using school mascot/logos. Obviously, the shirts are popular on campus and generate revenue that stays in this great town. I like Perkins when it comes to athletic decision making, but his decision to sue Joe College is pathetic. What a d-bag.
rockchalkjd (anonymous) says…
I'm with EK and austin5string - is there really not a better cause? As a student who works hard for fundraising for worthy causes, seeing this is an embarrasment.
AZHawk81 (anonymous) says…
It is a trademark issue, not copyright. Moreover, if you don't protect your trademark you run the risk of losing it. Protecting your mark, even in situations like this, is a necessary evil. Obviously bringing suit to protect the mark was legitimate as evidenced by the jury finding against Sinks. It is a likelihood of confusion issue with the trademark (is the consumered confused as to whether this is a licensed product), not a First Amendment issue. Unfortunately, Mr. Sinks may lose his business over it but he should have thought about that when he failed to comply with the court's order to stop selling certain shirts.
bigjaybabyjay (anonymous) says…
LSU v. Smack Apparel - Court of Appeals (5th circuit) conclusion: "the colors, content, and context of the offending t-shirts are likely to cause confusion as to their source, sponsorship, or affiliation..."
Color schemes and references to the university have been deemed protected by other courts. Also, this is an University of Kansas issue, not Athletics. Athletics just happens to control licensing, which differs at other schools.
Eurekahwk (anonymous) says…
These kids need to be careful getting invovled with this guy. The university has already pulled some really stupid stuff. They could very well get the names of all the dissenting students and expel them.
kvskubball (anonymous) says…
AZ...
I agree, he continued to sell items that the court had ruled violated trademark infringement, after the initial ruling, then the follow-up nailed him...
He is a business man who thought he could get around the system, and get the courts to side with him against 'big ole bad moneybags college - KU' .... Hello folks, KU is a public university, most of the money that goes into it comes from the public, and if they don't protect their trademarks, then college costs go up for students...
This is really stupid that the students have gotten involved in this...on the wrong side...
It's great to support the 'little guy' if he's doing business the right way, but this guy has not, so it goes against common sense to support the guy. Students are the one's who have been hurt by this...KU has had to spend a lot of money to protect their legal trademarks (money that could have been spent on improving the college experience, or reducing student costs), but as someone earlier said, if they don't, they face the likelihood that those products would become public domain, and lose the income from those items, resulting in higher fees...duh!!!!!!!
I guess higher education doesn't teach students what is right and what is wrong!
woodhawk (anonymous) says…
There are a number of things I'd like to respond to regarding a few comments here, but let me start with this; THE most telling sentence in this entire article is "One of my offers to them was to close the store to settle this thing and make it go away. They haven't answered those offers." Sinks was more than willing to let the issue drop, but the U doesn't really care about infringement or sullying its name. Don't be fooled for a second to think this is about trademark infringement. This is about money, period. Lew and KUAD can claim unlicensed products take scholarship money away from student athletes, but what that really means is that with the money not coming in from licensed products, the KUAD must supply the money for scholarships from other areas - basically, an out of pocket expense. In claiming it takes away schollie $$, this means that Lew and KUAD are unwilling to front the cash. Lew has doubled the KUAD budget in his time here with magnificent business decisions. This is one of them. Strictly business and nothing else, as cold-hearted as it may be. I'm always 100% behind the little guy on these things, but the whole case seems to depend on what passes as KUAD trademarks and what doesn't. The color blue? The word Kansas? A certain font? Please, let that discussion end there.
As for the righteous pricks who say the students should be fundraising for Haiti; You think there aren't already at least 25-30 student groups on campus doing the same? They're bleeding themselves and the town dry of fundraising for Haiti. Pick a cause. At any given time, there are thousands, maybe millions, of causes one could throw one's support behind. Should that mean we choose only what we deem the most noble? Of course not. We choose what matters to us at the time. We can have diversified interests. We can support more than one worthy cause at a time, although one, admittedly, is much more important than the other. Relax, I guarantee the students are doing what they are able for Haiti, even on limited budgets. They are also doing what they are able for something else that matters to them - Joe College. Despite your prickish beliefs, it is in fact possible to support more than one cause at any given time.
Eurekahwk - Unless the University is a Communist entity, I doubt with all my heart any students would be expelled because of this. Don't be ignorant.
JBurtin (anonymous) says…
Kudos to bigjaybabyjay for finding this excellent quote.
"LSU v. Smack Apparel - Court of Appeals (5th circuit) conclusion: "the colors, content, and context of the offending t-shirts are likely to cause confusion as to their source, sponsorship, or affiliation..."
I find the court's findings in this previous case to be perfectly reasonable. Despite the lack of the official Jayhawk logo, Joe College's shirts could easily be misconstrued by casual onlookers as being licensed apparel supported by the university.
I do like some of the shirts that Joe College offers, but I can't fault the University for protecting the image of their business as other colleges have obviously had to do in the past.
I think this business owner's best bet for staying in business is to become clever enough to make some T-shirts that college students would want to wear that don't directly relate to the University of Kansas.
hawkward1 (anonymous) says…
Muck Fizzou - Hey that logo at the top left of this page in the banner looks a lot like a KU official font and color.....hmmmmm.......watch out LJW. Luck Fou!
KU1992 (anonymous) says…
This is ridiculous. He doesn't use any trademarked signs. The students who make up the university love it, in general. All he did was made shirts that are blue and red and say funny things! You cannot tell me it has become illegal to make blue and red shirts because they look too much like a university's colors. That is ridiculous. How can anyone with half a brain say that it is right to sue Joe College. Freedom of expression is one of the main things preached at our beloved liberal arts college.
Why is the athletic director spearheading this anyway? If it is the university as a whole shouldn't someone higher up be in charge of this debacle. Oh wait i forgot, our athletic department owns our university now, and does whatever it wants.
This makes me sick
KU1992 (anonymous) says…
Now if you'll excuse me, since I can't play with Roy I'm going to go play with mySELF.
so sue me.
kckmedic (anonymous) says…
All of you guys saying that she should focus her efforts on something more important like Haiti are missing the point on a couple of levels. First, we have every right as American's to focus our attention and efforts in whatever direction that we choose. Second, does that mean that all of us should drop everything that we are doing every time there is a natural disaster somewhere in the world? I donated close to $400 dollars last year to the American Cancer Society and the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. That is a lot of money to me. Am I supposed to feel like a bad person because I haven't donated to Haiti? I don't think so. You guys who are arguing for the University should either go to the store and look at their selection or read previous stories about this to see the ridiculous decison the jury made regarding what shirts infringed and what didn't. They have never printed a shirt that says KU, University of Kansas, or Jayhawk. The closest that they come is using the words Kansas (which, last I checked is still a state and Lew has not received a trademark on the word) and Hawk. I really like the fact that the University has argued that the colors confuse people into thinking it is an official shirt. So, I guess that people should stop selling blue shirts in Lawrence. I'm with one of the previous posters who said that they like Lew's decisions regarding athletics but he's gone too far this time.
kckmedic (anonymous) says…
kvskubball,
KU Athletics Corporation has been a separate entity from the University since Lew got there. Therefore, they give the University a predetermined amount of money, and any expenditures that they make, including legal fees, do not take away from the college experience nor can they be used to reduce student costs.
kckmedic (anonymous) says…
bigjaybabyjay and JBurtin,
Kansas is in the 10th Circuit and 5th Circuit opinions are not binding on a Kansas case. The court may use it as persuasive authority but they are not bound to follow its decision. The 10th Circuit may rule in a completely contradictory manner to the 5th Circuit and be completely right. At that point, only the U. S. Supreme Court could overturn its decision.
pfister99 (anonymous) says…
As for the shirts that have player's names on them in school colors, I can see the infringement. In those cases, Lew would have been wise to offer employment to this guy for selling shirts students wore to the games.
As for the shirts like "muck fizzou" and "my coach can eat your coach", those are shirts the university could never honestly sell in their stores...and just hope somebody out there, like Mr. Sinks, would be making them. I hope I see those fizzou shirts on the 25th.
KUGuyInTarheelLand (anonymous) says…
If he never used a Jayhawk, or a KU symbol, what exactly is he infringing on? You cannot patent colors. The article said that Lew was upset because he used colors (paraphrase). Just because they are crimson and blue, does not mean they are an infringement. They can't be. For Lew to say that they have copyrighted "Blue and Red" would be on the same line as me saying I copyrighted sunlight and suing the clouds for covering it up.
KUGuyInTarheelLand (anonymous) says…
Oh, and he can use the names if he has permission and does not pay them for it. If anything, it's the names on the shirts who could have a case if the owners of said names didn't like what they said. No permission + greed = defamation of character lawsuit waiting to happen.
bayareajhawk (anonymous) says…
I'm 100% behind Joe College on this one.
This is definitely the big business (KUAC) using its deep pockets to smother the little guy with legal fees. Seriously, how can you support the University in this? Nobody was ever going to wonder if a Joe College shirt is officially licensed.
Screw Lew.
rockemchalkemrobots (anonymous) says…
Another fact that the cause police are missing is that Haiti's earthquake occurred on 1/12, and the press release for this event was dated 1/8, meaning it was in the works for at least several weeks prior to the earthquake. I suppose she could have gone to Haiti and warned them of the danger, but this would assume 1) clairvoyance on her part, and 2) that the people in Haiti would have believed her. Changing her cause mid-stream would be even more farfetched an expectation.
You may disagree with her choice of cause (I do as well), but at least she chose one. Next time she may choose one you're aligned with.
"No kidding, EK.. Let's have the Jamfest support a worthy cause, rather than some sleazebag business owner"
No one is stopping you from having your own Jamfest that supports whatever you want it to, unless Jamfest is trademarked...
Beak (anonymous) says…
But hey, baseball season is right around the corner. Go Hawks.
rc4life (anonymous) says…
I would just like to clarify a few things...
kuskubball and azhawk81---Joe college did not violate the lawsuit twice. He was penalized $127,000 for the 50 or so shirts they said confused confused consumers to being affiliated with the university. The $550,000+ was the amount ordered by the judge to pay for the KUAC legal fees. Meaning the University spent over a half million to try and end this guys business. Did they really need the entire might of the University Legal team to prove a point and make an example?
If this was any other small shop they would have been forced to close their doors because they could not stand up to the university. Sinks used to own a printing company before and sold his business and agreed to stay out of the businesss for 3 years. Then he started Joe College. That is why he had the money (his personal money) to stand up and fight for what he believes is his right. The first court agreement said he was to stop selling 53 of his shirts. Both sides claimed a victory in the ruling.
rc4life (anonymous) says…
Personally I think that anyone that claims the University is losing money can just continue to only purchase licensed shirts. You know stepping in their that they are not affiliated with the University. I for one buy both. I like supporting the local business and lets face it...They have some funny stuff! Joe College says things that the fan base thinks (look at how many are purcahsed!) that the KUAC will not say to try and remain politically correct.
rc4life (anonymous) says…
kckmedic--good follow up :)
AZHawk81 (anonymous) says…
KSA 21-3503 - I have to agree with you even though I find your username disturbing. It is clear from the majority of posts here that most posters don't understand the basic legal issues or facts of this case. This has nothing to do with the big bad wolf picking on the little guy. This is no different than any other person or entity protecting their property rights. KUGuyInTarheelLand would be right if this was a patent issue but, it is not. It is a trademark issue. In this situation you couldn't be more wrong. At least try to get some basic facts and knowledge on the subject before professing your lack of understanding. Ignorance of the law isn't a defense.
Vardar3285 (anonymous) says…
This has everything to do with the big bad wold picking on the little guy. If you can't see that you are most likely a money hungry corporate tool yourself AZHawk. Most likely you work for some sort of fortune 500. Corporate indoctrination in this country would make Joseph Stalin proud.
bayareajhawk (anonymous) says…
AZHawk, I graduated from one of the top law schools in the country. I'm pretty comfortable with my understanding of the legal issue.
yellowjayhawk (anonymous) says…
Joe College has signs all over its store and web site ensuring that buyers are aware that they are not purchasing officially licensed clothing. If a buyer is unable to interpret or understand what this message means, should Joe College be penalized? It's not the fault of the business that some buyers don't pay attention. By providing (in my opinion) MORE than ample warning, Joe College is doing all it can to ensure that its shirts are not mistaken for official KU clothing. Therefore, I feel that point is moot.
Additionally, are there many places of businesses in Lawrence as local as Joe College? I have known people to come to Lawrence specifically to check out that store. There’s nothing wrong with putting efforts into helping a local business owner, even if *some* do not think it as “noble” as helping Haiti. We all have to help each other out, especially when it comes to our neighbors.
bayareajhawk (anonymous) says…
well said, yellowjayhawk
and kcmedic, your posts were excellent
kureader (anonymous) says…
... way too many attorneys on this site ... but, since you're here I have a question. Couldn't the store owner change the color and maybe the fonts and continue to print t-shirts? Or, isn't there another way to modify the physical look of his products without changing any of the words? Granted, blue may be better, but how can Lew prevent a guy from selling, say, a pink or yellow "muck fizzou" t-shirt?
kureader (anonymous) says…
I'm not sure who's right or wrong here, but I don't buy KU's flimsey argument that the revenue generated from the store would have otherwise gone to KU. I've never seen a "muck fizzou" shirt at the KU bookstore. The bookstore also doesn't sell my favorite shirt: "Kansas, Home of North Carolina Basketball".
Mkultra (anonymous) says…
Ok trademark honks explain if you please how a blue shirt with the words "Muck Fizzou" on it is infringing on KU's trademark?
Does KU have interest in the color blue? The words "Muck Fizzou"?
On occasion I wear blue polo shirts to Allen that I did not purchase in the bookstore. This could be misinterpreted as being an official KU item. could this be construed as infringing KU's trademark and my shirt can be confiscated and I may be subject to a lawsuit?
AZHawk81 (anonymous) says…
bayareahawk - if no one was ever going to wonder if Sinks' merchandise was officially licensed then why did the jury find that there was a likelihood of confusion as to whether those shirts were officially licensed? Maybe you spent too much on that bay area legal education. Also, as you are an attorney, learn to parse my words. I said most, not all. A brilliant legal mind such as yours should be able to discern the difference.