ALLEN IVERSON AND JADAKISS A5 COMMERCIAL APPRECIATION!!!!

Phuzzy Badpheet said:
The difference is pretty clear. Both Kobe and Lebron wore the shoes, while LeBron's High School team was signed to Reebok, and while Bryant was a free agent, then still wearing number 8. Adidas owns Reebok, and they own the number 8 line for their Crazy 8 line, thus allowing usage for Reebok.

Iverson owns his name and image, and has never worn Nike during his pro career.
Click to expand...

Just because you wore a sneaker while not being paid for it doesn't give them free rein to release the sneaker years later while using their likeness. Giving Kobe and an underage Lebron free sneakers to wear doesn't mean years later you can profit from it. This is literally the exact same situation and this idea that them wearing a sneaker they weren't paid for making any sort of difference is laughable.

I'm not saying I have any inside information or anything, but the more realistic explanation for why Reebok hasn't been sued is one of two things. It was either not worth the trouble for Lebron and Kobe to sue for such minor monetary gain, or there is a grey area in copyright laws where you can get around paying if the likeness used isn't 100% blatant. This would also mean Iverson didn't really have a case.

I'd love to see some information that says you can use the likeness of a person if they wear your product while not being under contract.
 
Last edited:
dtb00201 said:
Just because you wore a sneaker while not being paid for it doesn't give them free rein to release the sneaker years later while using their likeness. Giving Kobe and an underage Lebron free sneakers to wear doesn't mean years later you can profit from it. This is literally the exact same situation and this idea that them wearing a sneaker they weren't paid for making any sort of difference is laughable.

I'm not saying I have any inside information or anything, but the more realistic explanation for why Reebok hasn't been sued is one of two things. It was either not worth the trouble for Lebron and Kobe to sue for such minor monetary gain, or there is a grey area in copyright laws where you can get around paying if the likeness used isn't 100% blatant. This would also mean Iverson didn't really have a case.

I'd love to see some information that says you can use the likeness of a person if they wear your product while not being under contract.
Click to expand...

you know the main reason why none of this makes any sense?

because it's Nike and they're not missing any chance at money if they could have they would have stopped reebok

but they cant tell reebok they cant produce a shoe they already produced if AI had actually worn the flight 96 im sure it would be coming out and there would be nothing reebok could do

much like the crazy 8s having Kobe's number and lakers colors slapped on em

if iverson didn't have a case why would they pull the shoe?
 
CashBanks said:
you know the main reason why none of this makes any sense?

because it's Nike and they're not missing any chance at money if they could have they would have stopped reebok

but they cant tell reebok they cant produce a shoe they already produced if AI had actually worn the flight 96 im sure it would be coming out and there would be nothing reebok could do

much like the crazy 8s having Kobe's number and lakers colors slapped on em

if iverson didn't have a case why would they pull the shoe?
Click to expand...

Which points to my 2nd option about a grey area in copyright laws. You notice that they released the Kobe 1's without Kobe's name right? If adidas just had free reign to do that there would be no reason to change it. Clothing companies use peoples faces on shirts all the time and they're allowed to do so if the image is changed enough. You're right about Nike not missing a chance at money, but it might not be worth it in the long run. It would probably cost more money in lawyer fees and having a case tied up in court than it would to just get rid of a small release of a single sneaker.
 
Last edited:
dtb00201 said:
Just because you wore a sneaker while not being paid for it doesn't give them free rein to release the sneaker years later while using their likeness. Giving Kobe and an underage Lebron free sneakers to wear doesn't mean years later you can profit from it. This is literally the exact same situation and this idea that them wearing a sneaker they weren't paid for making any sort of difference is laughable.

I'm not saying I have any inside information or anything, but the more realistic explanation for why Reebok hasn't been sued is one of two things. It was either not worth the trouble for Lebron and Kobe to sue for such minor monetary gain, or there is a grey area in copyright laws where you can get around paying if the likeness used isn't 100% blatant. This would also mean Iverson didn't really have a case.

I'd love to see some information that says you can use the likeness of a person if they wear your product while not being under contract.
Click to expand...
Nike lost, Reebok won.

Get over it.
 
Phuzzy Badpheet said:
Nike lost, Reebok won.

Get over it.
Click to expand...

Get over what? I don't have a horse in this race. I think Nike SHOULD pay Iverson if they made a shoe in his likeness. I own more Iversons than I do Nike's as a whole. I just think the point you're making is stupid.
 
dtb00201 said:
Get over what? I don't have a horse in this race. I think Nike SHOULD pay Iverson if they made a shoe in his likeness. I own more Iversons than I do Nike's as a whole. I just think the point you're making is stupid.
Click to expand...
Reebok won, Nike lost.

Stupid won.

What can I say?
 
Last edited:
I don't think they sued, but it would lead to legal issues.  So Nike did the smart thing and scrapped it.

MJ in response to AI's crossover. Well it doesn't really matter.. How many rings he got.
 
Yeh everybody was def more influenced by AI than Jordan.  MJ had the shoes but the only one wanting to be like him was Kobe

Meanwhile, EVERYBODY tried the crossover and had braids and arm sleeves.  To this day you see braids and sleeves in the league. 

But people are forgetting one of the biggest triats AI had that gave him that crossover appeal - his height.

Every time you saw him on TV they would talk about this little guy, normal people height in a league of giants, killing it.  Aside from the obvious urban influence to the league, his small stature made him likable and relatable.
 
Y'all really think AI influenced the game more than MJ? I can't stand the dude off the court but MJ changed basketball into the game you see today. His influence wasn't just national, it was global. He influenced Iverson, Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Carter, etc.and players all over the world.
 
Last edited:
Miss early 2000's NBA.

Ai :pimp:
Afro Kobe :pimp:
healthy TMac :pimp:
young KG :pimp:
Vinsanity :pimp:
Pierce and Walker :pimp:
Like Mike starring Bow Wow :pimp: :lol:
 
Last edited:
INFAMOUSERROR said:
Y'all really think AI influenced the game more than MJ? I can't stand the dude off the court but MJ changed basketball into the game you see today. His influence wasn't just national, it was global. He influenced Iverson, Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Carter, etc.and players all over the world.
Click to expand...
Different generations. The ones that made the aforementioned statement are most likely 80s babies who were not around/too young to see MJ in his prime. I was born in 1985 so I personally can't speak on how MJ changed the game with the gold chain and non traditional sneakers since I was too young. The first time I remember MJ was in the Concord 11s when I was in the 5th grade.

AI...dude got drafted when I was in middle school and he was extremely popular in high school. No doubt he left his mark, but his timing was right IMO. The whole And 1 streetball thing was in full swing, which gave more wind to the moves AI would do on court. As far as fashion goes, the whole urbanwear scene was also in fully motion, which went hand in hand with AI.

He caused a lot of controversies while the league was still traditional...from the baggy clothes to the game to AI the rapper.
 
I'm sure it's already been said but ... Garnett and Styles commercial was better

Also, generally speaking: SP > Jada.
 
AI deserves his credit, but he is overrated because his attittude prevented him from acconplishing much more. cats defend.him cuz hes.cool and all, but dude had on and off court issues and he never reconciled with it.
 
KingFoamNYC said:
In NYC AI > MJ when I was growing up. The whole hood wanted to be like him , dress like him, ball like him , talk like him. We just wore Jordan's but we all idolized AI
Click to expand...
Don't explain yourself to these dudes man. From 97 to 03 there was nobody more cared about than AI. I am only speaking for my city. Maybe in yall corn fed plain states MJ was not where I am from
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

fdub
Stop The violence Movement - Self Destruction 1989 (appreciation post)
Replies
5
Views
536
Magic33
Magic33
tr1ll
I propose a new SPOILER rule for media in NT's Terms and Rules.
Replies
20
Views
728
TSCQ
TSCQ
vinnuendo
Weird Nike Appreciation Thread
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
8K
mrdozo
mrdozo
B
Black woman calls cops only to be killed by cops.
Replies
11
Views
2K
1995
1995

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom