National Basketball Association v. Sports Team Analysis and
Tracking Systems (STATS) and Motorola (Sportstrax) case brief summary
105 F.3d 841 (1997)
CASE FACTS
Appellants were enjoined from transmitting scores or other data about professional basketball games in progress via handheld pagers. Appellees had brought various trademark and misappropriation claims against appellants for the transmissions. The district court found that appellants were liable for misappropriation. It also dismissed appellees' claims for false advertising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a).
DISCUSSION
On review, the court held that appellees' state law claims for misappropriation survived preemption. Because appellants expended their own resources to collect purely factual information, they did not free-ride on appellees' product. As to appellees' cross-appeal, the court held that the alleged false statements pertained to nonmaterial minutiae that did not misrepresent an inherent quality or characteristic of the appellees' product.
CONCLUSION
The court vacated the injunction because it found that appellants were not liable for misappropriation of the game data and affirmed the dismissal of appellees' Lanham Act claim because the false statements did not effect a misrepresentation of appellants' product.
Suggested Study Aid For Sports Law
105 F.3d 841 (1997)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellants, a marketer and a supplier,
sought review of a permanent injunction entered by the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, which barred
appellants from transmitting "real-time" sports game data
via handheld pagers. Appellees, a basketball association and a
related entity, cross-appealed the dismissal of their claims under §
43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a).CASE FACTS
Appellants were enjoined from transmitting scores or other data about professional basketball games in progress via handheld pagers. Appellees had brought various trademark and misappropriation claims against appellants for the transmissions. The district court found that appellants were liable for misappropriation. It also dismissed appellees' claims for false advertising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a).
DISCUSSION
On review, the court held that appellees' state law claims for misappropriation survived preemption. Because appellants expended their own resources to collect purely factual information, they did not free-ride on appellees' product. As to appellees' cross-appeal, the court held that the alleged false statements pertained to nonmaterial minutiae that did not misrepresent an inherent quality or characteristic of the appellees' product.
CONCLUSION
The court vacated the injunction because it found that appellants were not liable for misappropriation of the game data and affirmed the dismissal of appellees' Lanham Act claim because the false statements did not effect a misrepresentation of appellants' product.
Suggested Study Aid For Sports Law
No comments:
Post a Comment