Rob Walker recently wrote an article surrounding a Cease & Desist letter Mike founder, Scott Nelson received from Nike last month. The demand includes an “orderly withdrawal of all infringing products from the market,” and that Mike23.com be “disabled immediately, at least to the extent that any page shows or references an infringing mark, logo or design or references Michael Jordan.” Nelson states that he’s in no position to wage a legal fight. We visited Mike23.com and currently the online shop is closed, no products are viewable, the splash page has been changed from the logo you see above to one that bares no resemblance to any Nike-related logos. We really hope this won’t mean the end of Mike, since we have been big fans for a while now, and can only hope that this gets resolved soon.
mars 20, 2008 à 5:35
Streetwear, street culture and artists have always re-interpreted iconic logos and pop culture images to connect to people. (i.e. Andy Warhol) In their eyes they are ‘re-appropriating’ these images for their subculture. It has gone on and will continue to, they will draw out emotional response and debate about originality and legality.
I may be ‘dating’ myself here, but this reminds me of a situation back in 1992-3, when SSUR put out his ‘awidas’ t-shirt. He took the adidas fleur logo added two leaves making it look like a marijuana leaf. This was also at the time when GFS (Gerb, Futura and Stash) came out with their “Phillies Blunt” tees, which I believe they later granted them a license to use the logo for a fee instead of a long drawn out legal battle because the shirts generated such a buzz for the brand. (citation needed – lol)
It was different case with SSUR, the adidas legal team not only served him with a cease and desist, but with fines based on profits from the sales of the shirt. They went so far as to hitting the retailers (like Union and 555-Soul) with the same penalty.
The c & d stated that they did not want the brand affiliated with drug culture, which is funny since two years later they produce hemp footwear and this year are releasing a ‘shelltoe’ in tobacco color with a “Philies Blunt-looking” logo on the tongue. Corporate hypocrisy!
The point I want to address is why did Nike wait so long to address this situation with Mike 23. We have to understand that most corporate giant legal teams are so far removed from sneaker/street culture and even their own product departments that one notion could be that they didn’t even know Mike 23 existed until recently. Another thing is, even if Scott was flowing product to Mike Parker or Gemo Wong and they loved it, it has nothing to do with legal department. I’m sure there were meetings discussing the Mike23 once it did get to legal and the PR ramifications that will come from this, but you have to throw rhyme or reason out of the window when it comes to legal.
I mean look, Nike sues Mike 23, Mike23 sueing New Era for the crackle print, which was used by Jordan…