08-30-2008, 09:40 AM
Join Date: Nov 2005
Originally Posted by slkbassist
I don't find it ilegal at all. As mentioned by some, they are not claiming you can play like the athlete. They are just using the athlete's image to attract buyers. Just like clothes and food products...Lebron can't play like he does drinking Sprite all day, Jordan and Bird surely wouldn't have been able to move like that eating McDonalds and Lays all the time. And you know Gatorade, they have special formulas for athlethes not sold in stores!
I think that the issue is not with the PJs, the real problem is that companies don't continue of make available products that athletes use. The Head Prestige Classic, is an example of a racquet that should remain in production...there seems to be a wide enough demand, with most reviews claiming it to still be the most superior version of the racquet despite there being about 5 incarnations of it afterwards. Racquets should also be available to the public if an athlete uses a common though now extinct frame with a PJ...again pointing to the PC, if say Safin is using a straight up PJ PC, it should be still available.
However, custom made frames, are a different story, since it wouldn't be possible, it wouldn't be cost effective to try and make each frame variety.
You see there was a law suit in Sports with false advertising. Nike was sued over Tiger Woods' Golf Ball. Nike advertised that Tiger used the Nike Tour Accuracy when he did not. Tiger used a custom made ball. Days after Nike was sued they quickley released Tigers Golf Ball to the public.
Nike Admits Tiger Woods' Golf Balls Are Unavailable to the Public
In suit claiming unfair business practices, company states that alterations are 'minor'
San Francisco, August 27, 2000 -- Nike has done it again.
After being sued in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Nike acknowledged that the golf balls which Tiger Woods uses in professional competition are not available to the public. A nonprofit group, Public Remedies, filed a claim alleging that Nike is engaging in unfair business practices. At issue is the fact that Woods plays with "custom made balls unavailable" to consumers, rather than the "Nike Tour Accuracy" golf balls which Woods endorses in print and television advertisements. Additionally,
Public Remedies is calling for Nike's "ill gotten gains be restored to the public", according to the Associated Press.
In response to the lawsuit, a Nike spokesperson admitted that that the balls which Woods uses in competition have a "slightly harder inner and outer core than the balls sold to the public." Nike, however, also contends that it is commonplace for manufactures to make minor specification adjustments to the equipment which professionals use in competition. This notion is disputed by other golf equipment manufactures, such as Titleist and Callaway, who claim that the public is offered the same equipment that their professionals endorse, provided that the consumer may have to wait only for the equipment to be mass produced.
While Woods officially switched to the Nike ball before the U.S. Open this year, he claims that he can see no "appreciable difference" in the distance between the Nike ball and the Titleist ball, which he used previously, and which is available to the public, according to ESPNews.
Only days after this lawsuit was filed, Nike announced that the exact ball which Woods uses in competition would soon become available to the public, pending U.S. Golf Association approval, and be marketed as "Tour Accuracy TW". It is a decision which Nike maintains had been in the works long before the suit against them was filed. Nike also stated that the company would continue to defend against the pending lawsuit
Believe you me if a similar Law Suit was filed against the likes of HEAD, Babolat, and Wilson, you have the same kind of result.