It's true. It's bad PR to run locals out of business though, so no need to shout it from the hilltops.
New Upcoming Rule Regarding UK Gear
- Thread starter ORCAT
- Start date
It's true. It's bad PR to run locals out of business though, so no need to shout it from the hilltops.
It doesn't end any business so long as you don't keep what you're doing vague enough to avoid direct mention of the university.
For example "BLOCK PARTY" with a silhouette of a basketball player behind it in blue and white doesn't reference UK or the athletics program at all. Anyone can make that shirt.
"UK BASKETBALL 40-0" would be a no go.
I was expecting this to be a new rule where the wildcat tongue wouldn't look like a penis anymore. I remember wearing a sweatshirt to middle school in 6th grade and people pointing that out to me. I had no idea till I saw it myself
Never heard of JAmerica and don't know anything about their stuff. I refuse to pay the Nike tax though. If this is true, it's JAmerica or nothing for me then.
If Nike doesn't stop putting it's tags in the shoulder I'll never buy another shirt from them, UK or not. Ruined my sons UK camp shirt and one of my Final Four shirts trying to remove the damn thing.
This is actually a very common practice in apparel decoration. I used to work for a company that did collegiate licensed apparel. The contracts are called "Plus 1". The university signs them in order to be outfitted by a certain brand. In return UK is allowed to contract one other official decorator. Both decorators pay royalty fees to the university for using their trademarked images (i.e. logos).
This is nothing new, & UK has had a Plus 1 agreement on the men's side for many years. Smaller companies will usually continue to decorate since they do so in such small quantities that the university won't go after them. You just won't see larger companies like Russell or Adidas making UK gear. Keep in mind that the Men's contract is different from the Women's, Youth, & Unisex contracts. Most universities don't have Plus One or Plus Two, etc, agreements on Women/Youth/Unisex as the Men's contract is really the big slice of the pie. When I worked, the only Women's exclusivity contracts were for Tennessee & Louisville (both Adidas schools at the time w/ prominent women's sport programs).
Long story short... the contracts with Nike & JAmerica have been in place for at least 6 years to my knowledge. They may be cracking down now, but the contracts aren't new.
Also don't misconstrue these as corporate greed. UK wants this contract as much as Nike, since it allows them to control the garments that are put out there for public consumption.
This is nothing new, & UK has had a Plus 1 agreement on the men's side for many years. Smaller companies will usually continue to decorate since they do so in such small quantities that the university won't go after them. You just won't see larger companies like Russell or Adidas making UK gear. Keep in mind that the Men's contract is different from the Women's, Youth, & Unisex contracts. Most universities don't have Plus One or Plus Two, etc, agreements on Women/Youth/Unisex as the Men's contract is really the big slice of the pie. When I worked, the only Women's exclusivity contracts were for Tennessee & Louisville (both Adidas schools at the time w/ prominent women's sport programs).
Long story short... the contracts with Nike & JAmerica have been in place for at least 6 years to my knowledge. They may be cracking down now, but the contracts aren't new.
Also don't misconstrue these as corporate greed. UK wants this contract as much as Nike, since it allows them to control the garments that are put out there for public consumption.
It wont effect these places if they do it right. They just cant use the word kentucky or wildcats.
Last few years, UK has gotten incredibly aggressive with their brand protection. Im sure many remember the trademark lawsuit where they sued the little moonshine distillery in letcher county "kentucky mist" because he printed a blue shirt.
I think its ridiculous. But their stance is basically that anything blue with kentucky and/or UK and/or wildcats is infringement.
If you notice, the unlicensed apparal already avoid that. Its some phrase, a symbol, "big blue nation" (which is probably an eyelash from being defended too). They were probably served with cease and desist letters early on.
So theyll still be around. Others will have to evolve accordingly, or be willing to litigate. But yes, the price of anything officially licensed will go through the roof.
If you notice, the unlicensed apparal already avoid that. Its some phrase, a symbol, "big blue nation" (which is probably an eyelash from being defended too).
Way more than an eyelash. They spent hundreds of thousands fighting for BBN long ago, even though they had never used it and my company was the first in commerce to ever market the phrase.
(The real reason I was banned...btw.)
If you notice, the unlicensed apparal already avoid that. Its some phrase, a symbol, "big blue nation" (which is probably an eyelash from being defended too).
Way more than an eyelash. They spent hundreds of thousands fighting for BBN long ago, even though they had never used it and my company was the first in commerce to ever market the phrase.
(The real reason I was banned...btw.)
Not shocked. Sad. Someone really needs to litigate this to the end. Its ridiculous
Yeah makes sense and I thought of that too. But it's still a different story to tell people that they have to sell one product and not another. That being said, if the legislature wants to do something, they'll twist the argument around however they need to.
So basically if I want anything with a UK logo or says Kentucky on it I have to pay a 2000% Nike markup tax? Or whatever the hell JAmerica is charging, which will surely probably be at least a 1000% markup tax?
I'll just do without, **** that.
This is the same reason why I never buy any school apparel from the school I work at. Just checked the campus store website. Under Armour short sleeve t-shirt, not even one of those dri-fit types or whatever UA calls that type of shirt, just a regular ole t-shirt. Charging $30. Only graphics on it are the school name and the UA logo. $120 for a UA rain jacket. Not even waterproof either, just water resistant. $65 for a UA polo. $51 for Nike sweatpants. $72 for a Nike hoodie. $69 for a Nike polo.
It's even worse when you look at the prices for the Vineyard Vines, Peter Millar, etc. brands.
People are losing their god damn minds paying prices like that. People are just dumb.
Last edited:
Totally agree. If people would stop buying it at those prices, theyd come down. Our fanbase is a victim of our own making sometimes
JAmerica sells UK gear right now at lower prices and a little lower quality. Alumni Hall has carried JAmerica UK tees and sweatshirts for years now and it has been much lower priced than Nike. But, I could see them raising their prices in a deal like this if it goes as it is right now. I'm still waiting to see if JAmerica expands it's company agreement to include Champion and other companies to allow them to keep printing UK gear. That's what the manager told me could still happen.
