Upper Deck is suing Panini for using Michael Jordan images

auburn35 · 01-30-2020, 01:30 PM

Looks like Upper Deck is seeking damages for Panini releasing cards with MJ in the background.

Here's a lawyer (great Twitter follow) discussing the case.
https://twitter.com/Paul_Lesko/statu...907721217?s=19

Ober12 · 01-30-2020, 01:37 PM

By "deliberately altered and manipulated Jordan's image", do they mean he was photoshopped into those 2 cards? I don't know what the original pictures look like but that seems farfetched

Luni · 01-30-2020, 01:44 PM

Yeah this is ridiculous. Anyone who actually thinks that Panini left Jordan on these cards intentionally in order to boost sales of those products (or hurt UD's image) is crazy. Panini's QA has been terrible on a lot of things so it is obvious that these were just missed. I'm going to sue them for putting GALATIC on the backs of Revolution cards too.

That being said, I do think that Panini should have to pay a fine or licence fee for using those images. Incompetence does not excuse them.

the27guy · 01-30-2020, 01:44 PM

I saw this earlier on IG. Hmmm.

Here's my non-lawyer take - if it can be shown that they delibrately included MJ's image, then yes, I think Panini made a significant mistake here that should result in Panini having to pay what they are deemed to have made because of the intentional mistake.

If they did it unintentionally? Then I don't really know. I don't think it's okay that these cards (especially the Rodman) really help move the product. But, that's just such an easy mistake to make. Ugh. I don't know. Now I'm second guessing whether it matters if it was done intentionally.

Either way, UD is probably owed something here, if it can reasonably be shown that the inclusion of MJ's images resulted in more sales than if they had not included the images.

Good luck to UD proving that though.

KhalDrogo · 01-30-2020, 01:47 PM

Panini should pay them with 100 cases of 2019 NT. Seems fair.

Digerati · 01-30-2020, 01:51 PM

They should just combine all eBay sales of these cards and make Panini pay that amount to Upper Deck. The total amount would be tens or even HUNDREDS of dollars. That could totally fix every awful business and design idea that UD has had over the years.

Luni · 01-30-2020, 01:54 PM

Watch Panini turn this around and then try to sue them for releasing stuff like the Hardcourt product.

the27guy · 01-30-2020, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luni

Watch Panini turn this around and then try to sue them for releasing stuff like the Hardcourt product.

To me that felt like a more egregious action than this one.

Ober12 · 01-30-2020, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the27guy

I saw this earlier on IG. Hmmm.

Here's my non-lawyer take - if it can be shown that they delibrately included MJ's image, then yes, I think Panini made a significant mistake here that should result in Panini having to pay what they are deemed to have made because of the intentional mistake.

If they did it unintentionally? Then I don't really know. I don't think it's okay that these cards (especially the Rodman) really help move the product. But, that's just such an easy mistake to make. Ugh. I don't know. Now I'm second guessing whether it matters if it was done intentionally.

Either way, UD is probably owed something here, if it can reasonably be shown that the inclusion of MJ's images resulted in more sales than if they had not included the images.

Good luck to UD proving that though.

Maybe a good conclusion to this would be determining how much space that background player can take before it's considered trademark infringement. Case in point, that Pippen card should be totally fine (even if they moved it between Donruss and Optic, they could argue they were centering Pippen more), but the Rodman card clearly has MJ in there, very easily recognizable.

I guess a way to distinguish it is, would you talk about it when describing the photo? On one hand you have a photo of Pippen dunking, crowd in background. On the other, Rodman's clapping, with the crowd behind him, a Jazz player to one side and MJ to the other. This is a pretty subjective way at looking at it though, just a thought

ThoseBackPages · 01-30-2020, 01:57 PM

the27guy · 01-30-2020, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ober12

Maybe a good conclusion to this would be determining how much space that background player can take before it's considered trademark infringement. Case in point, that Pippen card should be totally fine (even if they moved it between Donruss and Optic, they could argue they were centering Pippen more), but the Rodman card clearly has MJ in there, very easily recognizable.

I guess a way to distinguish it is, would you talk about it when describing the photo? On one hand you have a photo of Pippen dunking, crowd in background. On the other, Rodman's clapping, with the crowd behind him, a Jazz player to one side and MJ to the other. This is a pretty subjective way at looking at it though, just a thought

Yeah... I think there's something to this. I'd imagine that there has to be some definitional language in agreements.

No question that the Rodman is a mistake. Just no question.

But to me, you think, 10 years of cards produced with thosands of different photos released, and only ONE with a clear big picture of MJ has made it through? I'd say that's pretty good honestly. Pretty good, obviously, doesn't cut it to Upper Deck, and I get that. But I honestly think Panini has done a pretty good job.

Scottish Punk · 01-30-2020, 02:08 PM

Lawyers gotta lawyer..

This seems like a big nothing burger to me. Are Jordan collectors really going after these cards? These cards are still "common" so Panini really didn't receive any bump in sales.

smalltown · 01-30-2020, 02:15 PM

This suit is about other suits. The two companies and Leaf and Topps are all suing each other. Claims like this are like currency, "I have something to drop if you drop that". It's really a case of not much to see here.

PKIPP · 01-30-2020, 02:20 PM

Panini should just play dumb and say it's a fan that looks like MJ

IndySportsCards · 01-30-2020, 02:21 PM

hope they pay UD in points cards

oshmeehan · 01-30-2020, 02:21 PM

Panini definitely does some intentional background manipulation on cards? What for? In this case I have no idea why.

Look in the bottom right corner.....only reason I can think of is Stauskas wasn't an NBA player anymore so couldn't be shown in 2019/20 releases? They also moved Coach Budenzoler from the far right of the Instant card to behind where Stauskas would have been on the Prizm card....

Soxfanguy · 01-30-2020, 02:24 PM

Who we rooting for? UD or Panini?

ATLOTP · 01-30-2020, 02:42 PM

Upper Deck sucks. Maybe they should focus on making a good product instead of suing people that do.

auburn35 · 01-30-2020, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

Lawyers gotta lawyer..

This seems like a big nothing burger to me. Are Jordan collectors really going after these cards? These cards are still "common" so Panini really didn't receive any bump in sales.

Yeah, probably nothing but there does some to be a collector base for cards that feature MJ as a secondary focus.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showth...dan+background

Silverandgold · 01-30-2020, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the27guy

To me that felt like a more egregious action than this one.

That's memorabilia, UD actually has a case with this one.

the27guy · 01-30-2020, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silverandgold

That's memorabilia, UD actually has a case with this one.

Maybe. But the line between memrobilia/cards doesn't feel very concrete to me.

Silverandgold · 01-30-2020, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soxfanguy

Who we rooting for? UD or Panini?

UDA, don't you want UD back in the game with MJ/Lebron?

Silverandgold · 01-30-2020, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the27guy

Maybe. But the line between memrobilia/cards doesn't feel very concrete to me.

Maybe if it was on card material but it was a game use floor piece.

Ober12 · 01-30-2020, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oshmeehan

Panini definitely does some intentional background manipulation on cards? What for? In this case I have no idea why.

Look in the bottom right corner.....only reason I can think of is Stauskas wasn't an NBA player anymore so couldn't be shown in 2019/20 releases? They also moved Coach Budenzoler from the far right of the Instant card to behind where Stauskas would have been on the Prizm card....

Interesting, it seems like they moved a whole chunk of the right side of the background to the left to cover up Mr. Castillo. You can see the turnovers banner is now fully visible and the Goodwill ad (the one on top of Nik's head) is gone

Silverandgold · 01-30-2020, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by auburn35

You can tell they are leaving him in on purpose. Same image year to year and MJ shows up?

01-30-2020, 01:30 PM	#1
auburn35 Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 4,293	Upper Deck is suing Panini for using Michael Jordan images Looks like Upper Deck is seeking damages for Panini releasing cards with MJ in the background. Here's a lawyer (great Twitter follow) discussing the case. https://twitter.com/Paul_Lesko/statu...907721217?s=19 __________________ Ashley Lelie Rookie Collector, always looking for more.

01-30-2020, 01:37 PM	#2
Ober12 Member Join Date: Jun 2019 Location: USA Posts: 771 rodoberl0	By "deliberately altered and manipulated Jordan's image", do they mean he was photoshopped into those 2 cards? I don't know what the original pictures look like but that seems farfetched __________________ Looking for: 2012-13 Green Prizm of Tiago Splitter. More cards I'm looking for in the link below, will gladly look at any rare Leandro Barbosas or other NBA Brazilians IG - @OberCards . . . . . . . . . . . FS/FT/LF List - tinyurl.com/OberCards

01-30-2020, 01:44 PM	#3
Luni Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: NC, USA Posts: 1,405 Luninutz Luni	Yeah this is ridiculous. Anyone who actually thinks that Panini left Jordan on these cards intentionally in order to boost sales of those products (or hurt UD's image) is crazy. Panini's QA has been terrible on a lot of things so it is obvious that these were just missed. I'm going to sue them for putting GALATIC on the backs of Revolution cards too. That being said, I do think that Panini should have to pay a fine or licence fee for using those images. Incompetence does not excuse them. __________________ Kevin Garnett Collector https://www.instagram.com/luni_kg 2018-19 Prizm Rainbow Status: 38/38 - Now Complete!

01-30-2020, 01:44 PM	#4
the27guy Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 14,671 the27guy the27guy	I saw this earlier on IG. Hmmm. Here's my non-lawyer take - if it can be shown that they delibrately included MJ's image, then yes, I think Panini made a significant mistake here that should result in Panini having to pay what they are deemed to have made because of the intentional mistake. If they did it unintentionally? Then I don't really know. I don't think it's okay that these cards (especially the Rodman) really help move the product. But, that's just such an easy mistake to make. Ugh. I don't know. Now I'm second guessing whether it matters if it was done intentionally. Either way, UD is probably owed something here, if it can reasonably be shown that the inclusion of MJ's images resulted in more sales than if they had not included the images. Good luck to UD proving that though. __________________ @thereal27guy Founder of Basketball Card Fanatic Magazine

01-30-2020, 01:47 PM	#5
KhalDrogo Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Posts: 41,077	Panini should pay them with 100 cases of 2019 NT. Seems fair. __________________ I love PSA!

01-30-2020, 01:51 PM	#6
Digerati Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Iceland Posts: 1,151 hugleikur digerati	They should just combine all eBay sales of these cards and make Panini pay that amount to Upper Deck. The total amount would be tens or even HUNDREDS of dollars. That could totally fix every awful business and design idea that UD has had over the years. __________________ PC : Anthony Davis, Stephen Curry & too many other side PC's https://www.instagram.com/AnthonyDavisCards/

01-30-2020, 01:54 PM	#7
Luni Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: NC, USA Posts: 1,405 Luninutz Luni	Watch Panini turn this around and then try to sue them for releasing stuff like the Hardcourt product. __________________ Kevin Garnett Collector https://www.instagram.com/luni_kg 2018-19 Prizm Rainbow Status: 38/38 - Now Complete!

01-30-2020, 01:57 PM	#10
ThoseBackPages Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Long Island Posts: 88,965 ThoseBackPages	__________________ Pumpers Paradise #YouCryIBuy Four things that we cannot change each others minds about: Politics, Religion, Third Party Grading, and 2021 Bowman's Best Rookie Cards

01-30-2020, 02:08 PM	#12
Scottish Punk Member Join Date: May 2013 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 9,347 scottishpunk	Lawyers gotta lawyer.. This seems like a big nothing burger to me. Are Jordan collectors really going after these cards? These cards are still "common" so Panini really didn't receive any bump in sales.

01-30-2020, 02:15 PM	#13
smalltown Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Canada Posts: 17,243 ifeature	This suit is about other suits. The two companies and Leaf and Topps are all suing each other. Claims like this are like currency, "I have something to drop if you drop that". It's really a case of not much to see here. __________________ Collecting: Raptors, Canadian Basketball Players, Vintage & More. PC: https://www.instagram.com/smalltown.cards/

01-30-2020, 02:20 PM	#14
PKIPP Member Join Date: May 2018 Location: Michigan Posts: 4,980	Panini should just play dumb and say it's a fan that looks like MJ __________________ i collect Miguel Cabrera, Detroit Tigers, Carmelo Anthony, Donovan Mitchell, Detroit Pistons Follow me on IG: Cardboard_vault

01-30-2020, 02:21 PM	#15
IndySportsCards Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: EO 13848 Posts: 41,904 braco0 IndySportsCards	hope they pay UD in points cards __________________ Most people would rather be in the majority, than be right.

01-30-2020, 02:21 PM	#16
oshmeehan Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 7,134	Panini definitely does some intentional background manipulation on cards? What for? In this case I have no idea why. Look in the bottom right corner.....only reason I can think of is Stauskas wasn't an NBA player anymore so couldn't be shown in 2019/20 releases? They also moved Coach Budenzoler from the far right of the Instant card to behind where Stauskas would have been on the Prizm card.... __________________ FEAR THE DEER

01-30-2020, 02:24 PM	#17
Soxfanguy Member Join Date: Aug 2018 Location: White Sox Posts: 15,579 Soxfanguy	Who we rooting for? UD or Panini? __________________ ok

01-30-2020, 02:42 PM	#18
ATLOTP Member Join Date: Dec 2019 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 794 snuurd	Upper Deck sucks. Maybe they should focus on making a good product instead of suing people that do.