Topic: Legion Poppy Copyright issues (bikers, NHL, etc.)

[Jim Seggie]

I ahve seen NHL hockey players sporting pink laces, CFL players with pink gloves and pink ribbon stickers on their helmets etc. To the credit of the Als and Tic Cats - they had the poppy symbol on their helmets.

I can't see why the RCL would be so against this.

[bossi]

Awesome.  Focussing solely on the issue of wearing the poppy, I did speak to the manufacturer of the Kitchener Ranger sweaters (i.e. when I asked him if I could get some poppies for our Regimental team, he said he'd have to get permission from The Legion - I trust him to have told me the truth)

Having said all of the above (and agreeing with virtually all of everybody's contributions ...) it never dawned on me that the NHL might be refusing to let teams wear the poppy because of extortion ... er, um ... back room discussions with The Legion ... but, a propos to the Legion's refusal to let those biker veterans include a poppy in their crest ... it's all starting to make more sense ...

At least we've got almost an entire year to get all parties on the same page ...
(i.e. "Selection and Maintenance of The Aim" - get poppies on to NHL uniforms!)

[ballz]

I ahve seen NHL hockey players sporting pink laces, CFL players with pink gloves and pink ribbon stickers on their helmets etc. To the credit of the Als and Tic Cats - they had the poppy symbol on their helmets.

I can't see why the RCL would be so against this.

The colour "pink" isn't trademarked. I doubt the ribbons are trademarked either, but they might be. Either way, the big factor, I think, would be the amount of money the NHL has versus CFL and junior hockey.

It's not that the RCL is against it, but compared to the CFL and Tier I Junior hockey teams, the NHL is a hell of a lot more profitable (we're talking by a factor of 100 or more) and the RCL probably (rightfully) expects them to pay a lot more.

Also, I'm pretty sure the players wouldn't be allowed to put the poppy stickers on their helmets for the same reasons. Everything is different when it's businesses and not individuals. Don't think for a second that the RCL couldn't demand that any company that any of normal joe works for not allow their employees to wear poppy's while working / wearing that company's uniform or else be sued. I can't think of any company with a bad enough reputation that the RCL would do that, but that's beyond the point.

Trademarks are a big deal, and anybody that owns a trademark has to protect it or they lose it.

Awesome.  Focussing solely on the issue of wearing the poppy, I did speak to the manufacturer of the Kitchener Ranger sweaters (i.e. when I asked him if I could get some poppies for our Regimental team, he said he'd have to get permission from The Legion - I trust him to have told me the truth)

He was telling the truth.

[bossi]

... It's not that the RCL is against it, but compared to the CFL and Tier I Junior hockey teams, the NHL is a hell of a lot more profitable (we're talking by a factor of 100 or more) and the RCL probably (rightfully) expects them to pay a lot more. ...

So, in other words ... rather than obtain exposure coast to coast on Hockey Night in Canada, the Legion would rather cut off their nose to spite their face?  Yup - time for a regime change.

[ballz]

So, in other words ... rather than obtain exposure coast to coast on Hockey Night in Canada, the Legion would rather cut off their nose to spite their face?  Yup - time for a regime change.

The Legion doesn't need exposure coast to coast, everybody coast to coast already recognizes the poppy for what it is.

It needs money though...

You can't point the finger at anybody without knowing the details. If there were/are any offers on the table, you'd need to know what they were. Let's say the CFL pays $10,000 to use the poppy each year around Nov 11. The CFL has annual revenues at best of $150 million/year*. The NHL has annual revenues of 2.7 billion/year**. So by that precedent the NHL should be paying $180,000. What if they are only offering to pay the same as the CFL? If I were the Legion, looking out for the Legion's interests, I'd tell 'em to go pound sand.

*http://sports.nationalpost.com/2011/09/04/fan-support-solid-revenues-mean-bright-future-for-cfl/
**http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2010/06/20100628/This-Weeks-News/NHL-Expects-Total-Revenue-To-Top-$27B.aspx

[bossi]

The Legion doesn't need exposure coast to coast, everybody coast to coast already recognizes the poppy for what it is.

It needs money though...

Fascinating perspective.  Personally, I wouldn't view the CFL or NHL as "using" the poppy.
Instead, I'd view it as honouring our fallen.
And, it the Legion is receiving zero dollars from the NHL at present ... it would seem fair to me that if the NHL teams wore commemorative sweaters, then auctioned them off like the Jr "A" teams and donated the proceeds to the Legion ... fair's fair.
The additional benefit to the Legion would be kids at home watching their NHL teams wearing the poppy (i.e. some kids look up to the NHL players, thus it would be positive reinforcement for the poppy)
Sorry to disagree with your well-presented financial analysis, however I thought it would be a "win-win" situation if the NHL teams wore the poppy (i.e. the poppy would be visible for the entire game, as opposed to only during the opening ceremony, and if the teams wore them for Remembrance Week it would mean multiple games - again, a huge step forward instead of the present zero sum - plus, the sweaters could then be auctioned off with the proceeds becoming "found money" for the Legion)

[ballz]

Fascinating perspective.  Personally, I wouldn't view the CFL or NHL as "using" the poppy.
Instead, I'd view it as honouring our fallen.
And, it the Legion is receiving zero dollars from the NHL at present ... it would seem fair to me that if the NHL teams wore commemorative sweaters, then auctioned them off like the Jr "A" teams and donated the proceeds to the Legion ... fair's fair.
The additional benefit to the Legion would be kids at home watching their NHL teams wearing the poppy (i.e. some kids look up to the NHL players, thus it would be positive reinforcement for the poppy)
Sorry to disagree with your well-presented financial analysis, however I thought it would be a "win-win" situation if the NHL teams wore the poppy (i.e. the poppy would be visible for the entire game, as opposed to only during the opening ceremony, and if the teams wore them for Remembrance Week it would mean multiple games - again, a huge step forward instead of the present zero sum - plus, the sweaters could then be auctioned off with the proceeds becoming "found money" for the Legion)

You're looking at it as "any revenue is good revenue" and while you're right, if the Legion sells itself short then there's a lot of potential revenue lost for no good reason.

Your example of auctioning off jerseys. 30 teams * ~25/players * ~150/jersey = 112,500. That is pennies for a $2.7 billion business. They would only be donating the jerseys (at a fraction of that 112,500), the fans would be donating the auction money.

Only squeezing a fraction of $112,500 from a $2.7 billion business to use your extremely recognizable trademark is terrible business. That's the same as me donating 83 cents, and I donated $5.00 from my miniscule Officer-Cadet salary. So if I were a member of a financially-struggling RCL, I'd be asking for a regime change if that was the deal that was bargained for on my behalf.

The additional benefit to the Legion would be kids at home watching their NHL teams wearing the poppy

Unfortunately warm fuzzy feelings can't be measured in dollars.




I'm going to take this time to reiterate that I would *love* to see a deal brokered between the RCL and the NHL that meant all the NHL players wore a poppy on their jerseys for the week leading up to Nov 11. I am just trying to bring some perspective on the possible complications before anybody goes blaming Bettman or the RCL.

EDIT: To add an analogy

[recceguy]

They should just sidestep the whole dollar\ copyright\ RCL issue and design their own poppy for use on their jerseys. Then it's not commercial, religious or political. Just their's.

Why get the RCL involved at all?

No one (signifigant) is going to stand up and rag on them for not using the commercial copyrighted poppy.

[E.R. Campbell]

They should just sidestep the whole dollar\ copyright\ RCL issue and design their own poppy for use on their jerseys. Then it's not commercial, religious or political. Just their's.

Why get the RCL involved at all?

No one (signifigant) is going to stand up and rag on them for not using the commercial copyrighted poppy.

I agree - no need for the RCL's copyrighted poppy ... but I'm still not convinced that lobbying the NHL, per se, is the best route. Remembrance Day and the poppy are uniquely Canadian things; the US has "Veterans' Day" on 11 Nov - an event which has a quite different focus (their Memorial Day is in the spring); they do not wear the poppy in the USA; thus, poppies on NHL team sweaters would only apply to the Canadians teams. Should we not, therefore, write to them (Canucks, Flames, Oilers, Jets, Maple Leafs, Senators and Canadiens)  suggesting that they plan something next year, for the two weeks leading up to 11 Nov, to honour our war dead, something in addition to the things most teams already do to honour veterans?

[Pusser]

Here's something.  What if each individual player went out on his own and bought a Legion copyrighted poppy -(just like anyone else) and then chose to wear it on their jersey (remove the pin and stitch it on).  Could the Legion do anything about that?  How different would that be from every CF member buying and wearing one?  The CF certainly doesn't pay any royalties to the Legion.

[ballz]

Here's something.  What if each individual player went out on his own and bought a Legion copyrighted poppy -(just like anyone else) and then chose to wear it on their jersey (remove the pin and stitch it on).  Could the Legion do anything about that?  How different would that be from every CF member buying and wearing one?  The CF certainly doesn't pay any royalties to the Legion.

Yes, the Legion could do something about that. It is a registered trademark, and they reserve the legal right to stop anybody from wearing it if they believe it would "tarnish" the trademark. The Legion could stop YOU or anyone of us from wearing a poppy if they so choose. It is their property.

What if some alleged serial killer/rapist was currently on trial for his crimes and was wearing a poppy to and from court, and was being photographed and shown on national media wearing *your* trademark. You would probably want to take legal action against him to stop him from being associated with you and your organization. What if he was wearing a Toronto Maple Leafs hat on his way to court? The Leafs would probably have a lawyer send him a letter saying "you better stop wearing that hat to your court appearances, or we're going to take legal action," because quite frankly the Leafs wouldn't want their symbol, their name, associated an alleged serial killer/rapist.

The fact that an NHL player buys his own individual poppy becomes irrelevant when he puts it on his uniform (after all, that's what a hockey jersey is) next to another registered trademark that the Legion may or may not want to be associated with. I am sure you will see lots of video images of players arriving at the rink with a poppy on their blazer, and the RCL won't do anything/care. But the game changes completely when they wear it next to another registered trademark (that franchise's logo).

The Legion doesn't stop CF members from wearing a poppy, but it *could* if it decided it did not want it's trademark associated with CF members. The Legion doesn't ask for money from the CF for obvious reasons.


I suppose I've spouted off about trademarks enough that I should back up what I am saying. Everything I am saying is from memory of what I learned in my Business Law course in the chapter about trademarks, etc. I am now going to get it back from the person I lent it to last semester and skim through it, to make sure I'm not misremembering info.

[milnews.ca]

Here's something.  What if each individual player went out on his own and bought a Legion copyrighted poppy -(just like anyone else) and then chose to wear it on their jersey (remove the pin and stitch it on).  Could the Legion do anything about that?  How different would that be from every CF member buying and wearing one?  The CF certainly doesn't pay any royalties to the Legion.

The other side of the coin would be:  would players be allowed, under the league's rules, to sew stuff onto their jerseys?  Here's what the rules I can find say:

.... All players of each team shall be dressed uniformly with approved design and color of their helmets, sweaters, short pants, stockings and skates ....

It sounds like someone in the league hierarchy would have to give the approval for a uniform design.  That's another reason why it might make sense to find team-wide solutions, rather than having individual players alter their kit (apparently) against the rules.

[ballz]

So I got my textbook ("The Law and Business Administration in Canada"12th Ed, by Smyth, Soberman, Easson, and McGill) and it seems the NHL has been into a legal battle over this kind of thing before.


"Section 19 of the (Trade-marks) Act gives the owner of a valid registered trademark the exclusive right to its use throughout Canada in respect of the goods and services for which it was registered. No unauthorized person may then sell, distribute, or advertise any goods or services in association with a confusing trademark or trade name (section 20), or otherwise use the mark in a manner that is likely to have the effect of depreciating the value of the goodwill attached to it (section 22)."

^^^See "advertise" above. That's exactly what the NHL would be doing if they had poppies on their jerseys. "Advertising" the poppy.

For this next bit, "passing off" is an offence under Tort law, meaning you can be sued for financial damages. But you don't have to have your trademark registered to sue someone for "passing off." However, what they are saying is that if you do have it registered, you don't need to meet the requirements of "passing off" to sue them.

"Actions for Infringement
Unauthorized use
One major advantage of registration is that unlike passing off, a registered trademark may be infringed by any unauthorized use of that mark or a confusingly similar mark by some other person"

Now, the NHL's past experience:

"In some recent cases, plaintiffs have argued that the definition of passing-off should be expanded to include situations where one person makes use of a well-known trade name or mark in order to obtain a benefit, even though the owner cannot show any damage and there is no likelihood of confusion in the minds of the public.¹² To date, this view has had only limited success in the courts and the argument is more effective under the statutory causes of action."

12. In rare circumstances when the passing-off deliberately suggests an association with another's product, it may not be necessary to show damage. For Example, an advertising campaign that incorrectly associates a product with another's product may actually benefit that other product, but might still amount to passing-off: see National Hockey League v. Pepsi-Cola Canada Ltd. (1995(, 122 D.L.R (4th) 412.




Key words up there, "a confusingly similar mark." You are going to have a hard time creating an image of a poppy, no matter how you alter it, and putting it on jerseys on Nov 11, and it not being considered "confusingly similar" to the RCL's registered trademark.

[2010newbie]

Key words up there, "a confusingly similar mark." You are going to have a hard time creating an image of a poppy, no matter how you alter it, and putting it on jerseys on Nov 11, and it not being considered "confusingly similar" to the RCL's registered trademark.

Has there actually been a decision from RCL that states the NHL cannot use the Poppy during Remembrance Day? Has the NHL even asked? As opposed to continuing with assumptions, shouldn't efforts be directed towards petitioning the NHL or specific teams to adorn their helmets (sweaters, Jerseys, skates, whatever) with the poppy during the two weeks prior to Remembrance Day as opposed to coming up with excuses as to why the RCL "might" say no?

As I posted earlier, MLSE used the Poppy image, displayed on the ice, during the Remembrance Day game this year and I have yet to hear of any report stating the RCL is sending "cease and desist" letters to MLSE either.

Here's the video of the pre-game and you can see the RCL Poppy symbol being shown on the ice (yes, I know they show other poppies as well, but the one on the ice is clearly the RCL poppy):

http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console

You need to scroll through the videos at the bottom of the page to the video titled "Remembrance Day Tribute - 11/08/2011". The videos are chronological so it shouldn't be too difficult to find.

Here's a link to the CBC discussing the Poppy sticker which I think we should try and get on the players helmets (and also the one shown on the ice in the video above):

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2008/11/05/poppy-stickers.html

And a link to the Legion website showing the same poppy:

http://www.legion.ca/Poppy/campaign_e.cfm

Again, I think our interests would be better served by contacting the individual teams and requesting the sticker be placed on the helmets. I have a contact with MLSE that I have used before for some TMFRC fundraising, so I will contact him tomorrow.

Edited to Add:

Here's a link to an image of the "Pink Ribbon" helmets and the Leafs (as well as most other NHL teams) participate in each year:

http://media.fans.nhl.com/_Hockeys-Cancer-Fight-Hits-Close-to-Home/BLOG/393687/111820.html

[ballz]

Has there actually been a decision from RCL that states the NHL cannot use the Poppy during Remembrance Day? Has the NHL even asked? As opposed to continuing with assumptions, shouldn't efforts be directed towards petitioning the NHL or specific teams to adorn their helmets (sweaters, Jerseys, skates, whatever) with the poppy during the two weeks prior to Remembrance Day as opposed to coming up with excuses as to why the RCL "might" say no?

There's not much info on it. I'm not "continuing with assumptions" or "making excuses" for anybody, I am pointing out that it is not as simple as you seem to think it is (such as making a "different" poppy, or "well they put pink ribbons on there so they must be able to put poppies on there"). You're right, efforts should be directed towards lobbying, but not knowing the issues surrounding what you're lobbying for isn't going to make your lobbying efforts very effective or efficient.

As I posted earlier, MLSE used the Poppy image, displayed on the ice, during the Remembrance Day game this year and I have yet to hear of any report stating the RCL is sending "cease and desist" letters to MLSE either.

Apples and melons. The ACC does not belong to the NHL and whatever authorization / deal that was worked out between MLSE and the RCL has absolutely no bearing on any talks between MLSE and RCL. You didn't hear about any cease and desist letters, but you also didn't hear about what deal was struck or how much MLSE had to pay to the RCL to put the poppy there either, did you?

Again, I think our interests would be better served by contacting the individual teams and requesting the sticker be placed on the helmets. I have a contact with MLSE that I have used before for some TMFRC fundraising, so I will contact him tomorrow.

Individual teams are franchises, governed by the franchisor which is the NHL. They can't put a registered trademark on their helmet without the NHL's permission (as was already pointed out). The NHL can't give them permission to do it without permission from the RCL (as was already pointed out).

Here's a link to an image of the "Pink Ribbon" helmets and the Leafs (as well as most other NHL teams) participate in each year:

That has *nothing* to do with the RCL and it's trademarks. The pink ribbon, which according to Wikipedia (it has a citation but it's not working at the moment) in most places is considered public domain, although in Canada it's "a special form of trademark reserved for governmental and charitable organizations." Either way, what organization XYZ chooses to do with it's trademarks is completely irrelevant to what company ZYX chooses to do with it's trademarks.

[2010newbie]

Apples and melons. The ACC does not belong to the NHL and whatever authorization / deal that was worked out between MLSE and the RCL has absolutely no bearing on any talks between MLSE and RCL. You didn't hear about any cease and desist letters, but you also didn't hear about what deal was struck or how much MLSE had to pay to the RCL to put the poppy there either, did you?

Point is that a relationship must exist, so it is feasible to request that relationship be extended and the players wear the poppies for the two weeks. You, nor I, are capable of determining what type of financial remuneration be provided or negotiated for the use of the poppy that would be acceptable to both the RCL and MLSE/NHL. For all we know, MLSE was allowed to use it for free as long as Legion members could distribute poppies at the gates. We don't know and it is irrelevant to this discussion.

Individual teams are franchises, governed by the franchisor which is the NHL. They can't put a registered trademark on their helmet without the NHL's permission (as was already pointed out).

As milnews.ca already pointed out from the nhl.com article, the NHL supports the wearing of poppies:

The most prominent dedication will be the wearing of poppies across the League.

And as you saw during the two week time period, many of the coaching staff wore poppies and many teams held some sort of tribute during that time frame.

That has *nothing* to do with the RCL and it's trademarks.

I'm not suggesting that because the pink ribbon has been displayed that the RCL would give permission. The point is that similar events have happened in the past to raise awareness and the teams/NHL have supported them.

Again, the point is that we should do something to try and get whoever needs to be involved to agree to have the players wear some sort of poppy during the two weeks leading up to Remembrance Day. I'm following Bossi's lead and contacting MLSE to try and find out additional info on how we implement this. Here's what I sent to MLSE:

A discussion has come up between some current serving military and some veterans regarding the NHL and the player's wearing the "Poppy" in the lead up to Remembrance Day. Understandably, players could not wear the typical lapel poppy with a straight pin, but the Royal Canadian Legion also distributes poppy stickers that could be adhered to helmets in a similar fashion that the "Pink Ribbons" have been in the past (http://media.fans.nhl.com/_Hockeys-Cancer-Fight-Hits-Close-to-Home/BLOG/393687/111820.html).

As the XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, would you be the person we would discuss this with to try and have this implemented for next year?

Thanks,

[ballz]

Point is that a relationship must exist, so it is feasible to request that relationship be extended and the players wear the poppies for the two weeks. You, nor I, are capable of determining what type of financial remuneration be provided or negotiated for the use of the poppy that would be acceptable to both the RCL and MLSE/NHL. For all we know, MLSE was allowed to use it for free as long as Legion members could distribute poppies at the gates. We don't know and it is irrelevant to this discussion.

Really? The legal topics surrounding the ability to wear the poppy is irrelevant? I'm not sure what it's like in Imagination Land but in the real world you have to conduct your business according to the law. It's not the least bit irrelevant if the NHL is offering $1 to put poppies on all their jersey and the RCL wants $1,000,000.... Actually, if the case is that they can't agree on a deal, then that is pretty much the only relevant topic.

the NHL supports the wearing of poppies:

And as you saw during the two week time period, many of the coaching staff wore poppies and many teams held some sort of tribute during that time frame.

The point is that similar events have happened in the past to raise awareness and the teams/NHL have supported them.

Then that should be your first clue that there is a dispute somewhere between the RCL and the NHL, if the NHL "supports" wearing the poppy but won't allow players to do so while they're wearing their uniforms.

 

Again, the point is that we should do something to try and get whoever needs to be involved to agree to have the players wear some sort of poppy during the two weeks leading up to Remembrance Day. I'm following Bossi's lead and contacting MLSE to try and find out additional info on how we implement this. Here's what I sent to MLSE:

Yes, we should pressure the NHL and RCL (the two parties who "need to be involved") to come to some sort of agreement. Understanding the actual problem sure isn't going hurt that cause. I would suggest, in your efforts and having a contact, you try and find out what the actual issue is (the OP doesn't even have a source for Bettman or the NHL not allowing the poppies), instead of just trying make a lot of noise.

[recceguy]

Like I said. Don't use the legion poppy. Make your own.

No need to involve the legion in any of it. They don't deserve the research and discussion your giving them.

Let them stew, suffer and facepalm themselves for letting a public relations coup slip through their fingers.

[ballz]

Like I said. Don't use the legion poppy. Make your own.

No need to involve the legion in any of it. They don't deserve the research and discussion your giving them.

Let them stew, suffer and facepalm themselves for letting a public relations coup slip through their fingers.

That would most likely still be considered infringement

"Actions for Infringement
Unauthorized use
One major advantage of registration is that unlike passing off, a registered trademark may be infringed by any unauthorized use of that mark or a confusingly similar mark by some other person""

Using "your own poppy" on Nov 11 would easily be considered a "confusingly similar mark." If they were going to go that route, I am guessing they would have to avoid the poppy altogether. And I'm not sure how you could make a good Remembrance Day sweater without some form of the poppy.

[GAP]

Simple....use the Support the Troops ribbon......everybody recognizes them.....

[ballz]

Simple....use the Support the Troops ribbon......everybody recognizes them.....

Agreed, and I think they would have to incorporate that, into the jersey if they didn't have the poppy... but I don't see the yellow ribbon as a symbol of remembrance, can't speak for anybody else though.

[recceguy]

That would most likely still be considered infringement

"Actions for Infringement
Unauthorized use
One major advantage of registration is that unlike passing off, a registered trademark may be infringed by any unauthorized use of that mark or a confusingly similar mark by some other person""

Using "your own poppy" on Nov 11 would easily be considered a "confusingly similar mark." If they were going to go that route, I am guessing they would have to avoid the poppy altogether. And I'm not sure how you could make a good Remembrance Day sweater without some form of the poppy.

Well, I'm not a lawyer, nor do I profess to play one here, or on television.

IMHO, while your argument might have some legal basis to it, they (RCL) don't have the ballz to use it. (see what i did there ) It would amount to corporate public relations suicide.

If that were the case, why haven't they gone against all other representations, including the white ones they are so vehement about? What you're basically saying is, no one, not one person or entity, anywhere in Canada, can reproduce a poppy in any configuration.

I call:

[ballz]

Well, I'm not a lawyer, nor do I profess to play one here, or on television.

IMHO, while your argument might have some legal basis to it, they (RCL) don't have the ballz to use it. (see what i did there ) It would amount to corporate public relations suicide.

If that were the case, why haven't they gone against all other representations, including the white ones they are so vehement about? What you're basically saying is, no one, not one person or entity, anywhere in Canada, can reproduce a poppy in any configuration.

I call:

You can call it bullshit all you want. I actually have an education in this field, and I learned this from a professional lawyer, and I am quoting a current Business Law textbook. I also finished this course above a 90%, so that lawyer doesn't think I am full of crap. My "argument" (which it is not, it's merely a bit of perspective on the issue) does have a ton of legal basis to it.

I am not sure why you find it so unbelievable, considering the recent happenings with the motorcycle group. http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=103106.0

"A spokesman for the Legion said this rule has been around for 60 years. Every group must legitimately apply to use the poppy, which he said this group has not."

"Martin added unscrupulous organizations are using the poppy on a consistent basis and the Legion has had to be much more active. He said if one organization is allowed to use the poppy, the flood gates would open for other groups." (Like I said, trademarks must be protected or you lose it)

I am not sure why you think it would be different for the NHL. The Legion still has to protect it's trademark.



And the RCL did threaten legal action against people producing white poppies. http://www.ppu.org.uk/whitepoppy/white-news1.html

"It arrived in an envelope, in the form of a legal threat. The Royal Canadian Legion was demanding that we stop making white poppies available in Canada, or else. That was the gist, though expressed in more formal language. According to the RCL’s legal representatives, the white poppy infringes the Legion’s poppy trademark. We have sent a lengthy reply."

"It was the enthusiastic promotion of white poppies by Women in Black and Earth's General Store in Edmonton that caught the Canadian Legion’s eye. The threat of legal action against Earth's General Store brought the issue of white poppies to a much wider Canadian audience."


The trademark is for a "red" poppy with a black or green center (the links are provided on the other thread). That said, a pink poppy with a black centre would definitely be "confusingly similar." Earth's General Store subsequently decided not to continue producing white poppies, so it's not possible to predict how that would have ended up in court.


You're right on one thing though, the RCL doesn't have to go after the NHL legally. They could give them permission to do it, no big deal at all. But personally I'd rather collect some coin from a 2.7 billion dollar business.

What you're basically saying is, no one, not one person or entity, anywhere in Canada, can reproduce a poppy in any configuration.

No, RG, that is not what I am saying. I am just quoting Trade-marks Act. It would be up to a judge, if it ever got that far, to determine if any particular configuration of a poppy is "confusingly similar."

[Shipwreck]

Is it really that big of a deal that NHL teams wear a poppy on their jerseys? Sure, they should be allowed to in a perfect world, but it's between them and the legion to sort it out. It seems like a really trivial thing to bicker about.

[recceguy]

Which is why lawyers will follow politicians to the wall, when the revolution comes