Zach Levet Illegally Selling Nike Embroidered Apparel?

Nike don’t play games.

“For this case, Nike is claiming trademark infringement of both the term ‘Nike’ as well as their Swoosh logo. If you’ve received this, it’s extremely important to respond to the courts, as you likely have 21 days to respond. If you haven’t been served yet, you will have 21 days to respond once that process service is effective.You have an obligation to file an answer with the court. Your failure to file that answer could result in a default judgment filed against you in which the plaintiff can be awarded a high amount of damages simply for your failure to appear or respond to the lawsuit.“

https://www.amazonsellerslawyer.com/blog/nike-lawsuit-against-amazon-sellers/

Zach better pack it up

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/12/amazon-sues-influencers-for-allegedly-marketing-counterfeits.html

first time, long time wrote:

Don't jump! wrote:

I think that this is a pretty good take. Levet is way too small potatoes for Nike's mega legal team. Although Levet's reputation will have taken a hit, he's not doomed for life. I do feel bad for his parents though. Also a reminder to the Let'srun lynch mob not to get too excited about fresh blood.

If he's too small potatoes for Nike, why'd they deem him influential enough to send free gear to promote their brand? What's the message to his following (which is significant within the running community, whether any of us want to admit it or not) if they let people off easy for infringement?

No one is too small for Nike. Large corporations will chase small time infringements since if they don't it will hurt them in court during large cases. In the past companies allowing small cases of infringement has been used as evidence against the company for not being consistent with copyrights when they take on a large case. Since then it has been in the interest of large companies to chase any case of infringement no matter how small.

4thYearFreshman wrote:

first time, long time wrote:

If he's too small potatoes for Nike, why'd they deem him influential enough to send free gear to promote their brand? What's the message to his following (which is significant within the running community, whether any of us want to admit it or not) if they let people off easy for infringement?

No one is too small for Nike. Large corporations will chase small time infringements since if they don't it will hurt them in court during large cases. In the past companies allowing small cases of infringement has been used as evidence against the company for not being consistent with copyrights when they take on a large case. Since then it has been in the interest of large companies to chase any case of infringement no matter how small.

I'm not saying Nike won't protect their brand's interests. I just think that they'll do it in the most streamlined way. There shouldn't be much of a legal fight from Levet if he's been caught manufacturing fake products. It's the threat of a a big lawsuit that makes these little guys disappear rather quickly. Nike then moved on. Making an example of Zach in some grand public way serves no purpose.

Zach is too lazy and uninteresting to be a successful Youtuber. As far as I understand how Youtube works, to make okay money from it, you have to post almost everyday if you don't have millions of subscribers. Zach posts once or maybe twice a week. In his video where he bragged about how much money he made, he admitted that he did not make a lot from Youtube and that most of his money was from the "business" that is the topic of this thread.

malmo wrote:

FWIW.

"Nike" = trademark

"Just do it" = copyright

Got it?

Where did you get that information?

Nike, “Just Do It” and the swoosh symbol are all trademarks.

Copyrights are applied to original intellectual property.

4thYearFreshman wrote:

first time, long time wrote:

If he's too small potatoes for Nike, why'd they deem him influential enough to send free gear to promote their brand? What's the message to his following (which is significant within the running community, whether any of us want to admit it or not) if they let people off easy for infringement?

No one is too small for Nike. Large corporations will chase small time infringements since if they don't it will hurt them in court during large cases. In the past companies allowing small cases of infringement has been used as evidence against the company for not being consistent with copyrights when they take on a large case. Since then it has been in the interest of large companies to chase any case of infringement no matter how small.

That’s where the cease and desist comes in. If he continues making knockoffs than they will really come down on him.

Runner10287 wrote:

That’s where the cease and desist comes in. If he continues making knockoffs than they will really come down on him.

So if i'm one of his 100k subscribers, even just 1% of that base.... and I realize I can buy a couple sewing machines, sell 6 figures worth of nike gear and pocket tens of thousands, and the worst that will happen is nike says "hey don't do that!", why shouldn't I do the same? seems like easy money to me.....

I could see nike pursuing something not even to seek financial gain, but just for future deterrence. I'm sure they have tons of such filings already, and can't imagine it would take much time/effort to recycle any of those towards using here.

Intellectual property is property you create and falls into three categories

Patent - you create a new invention - you get a patent so that other people can not make the exact product

Copyright - ie authorship, music recording, movie

Trademark - a symbol that identies yoru product to the mark - ie a pepsi can design

In al cases you want the person to stop using your "idea" First you can reuest that they cease. Next you can sue for many thingsthe most common of which is lost profits (money I would have made had you not been selling the exact same product as mine)

“A trademark or service mark includes any word, name, symbol, device, or any combination, used or intended to be used to identify and distinguish the goods/services of one seller or provider from those of others, and to indicate the source of the goods/services.”

https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-getting-started/trademark-basics

Your patent definition needs some work, too, but that’s irrelevant to the current topic.

Self-reported creatives are a strange lot. I had a prospect, a cosmetologist. who wanted a logo that looked just like a bottle of Dior perfume. Same color and font. Why? Because she named her daughter "Dior". Incidentally, and I kid you not, she named her two other kids "Chanel" and "Armani".

malmo wrote:

This thread is ridiculous. Zach Levit is just a goofy kid with little real world experience. His biggest life accomplishment so far is getting his own apartment for crapsakes.

He isn't going to be arrested and most likely not sued. He will get a cease and desist from Nike demanding an accounting of his sales and forfeiture of any existing lnventory. If he complies , that will be the end of it.

Lessons for Zach. Don't ever divulge or boast about the details of your personal finances or business. Secondly you have a means of production and distribution for your own original creative products. Use it.

The old he’s just young and goofy defense.

It gets rolled out every time when perfectly capable adults don’t want to take responsibility for their actions.

thoughts and prayers wrote:

malmo wrote:

This thread is ridiculous. Zach Levit is just a goofy kid with little real world experience. His biggest life accomplishment so far is getting his own apartment for crapsakes.

He isn't going to be arrested and most likely not sued. He will get a cease and desist from Nike demanding an accounting of his sales and forfeiture of any existing lnventory. If he complies , that will be the end of it.

Lessons for Zach. Don't ever divulge or boast about the details of your personal finances or business. Secondly you have a means of production and distribution for your own original creative products. Use it.

The old he’s just young and goofy defense.

It gets rolled out every time when perfectly capable adults don’t want to take responsibility for their actions.

Agreed. Whatever happened to law and order?

The young and goofy defense holds up waaaayyy better in front of a judge when the young and goofy kid is enrolled in college.

pavement88 wrote:

The young and goofy defense holds up waaaayyy better in front of a judge when the young and goofy kid is enrolled in college.

Is he?

Stan the man wrote:

pavement88 wrote:

The young and goofy defense holds up waaaayyy better in front of a judge when the young and goofy kid is enrolled in college.

Is he?

No

big buddy 69 wrote:

Stan the man wrote:

Is he?

No

Why not?

Too dumb. See the rest of this thread.