• njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    10 hours ago

    God who do you root for in this the evil Corporation or the evil University that supports fascism?

    • pdxfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      24 minutes ago

      Celebrity deathmatch needs to come back. The latent anger in the country and number of people who have unfairly escaped evolutionary norms are about 1 step away from The Purge. Clay would be preferable.

  • protist@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    15 hours ago

    …why did Columbia University sign an agreement with Columbia Sportswear limiting themselves like this? The university was over 180 years old before the sportswear company was even founded

    • tate@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Because of how trademarks work.

      180 years ago Columbia University was not in the sportswear business.

      • protist@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Columbia Sportswear was established in 1938, when Columbia University was over 180 years old. It wasn’t established 180 years ago. In 1938 college sports had been around for decades already. “Because of how trademarks work” isn’t a satisfactory answer to my question

  • Rhaedas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    16 hours ago

    The title sounds ridiculous, but the details make sense. It’s not just the name, but the name combined with a product, and the university didn’t hold up to the agreement to make theirs unique enough. Imagine if the university started producing music albums and putting their name on it, I think Columbia Records (Sony) would be like, hold up…