Originally Posted by bluetrain4
I'm assuming that there has to be very specific marketing practices at issue. Clearly, it wouldn't be enough it Fed uses a frame that looks like the BLX 90 or whatever on TW, but that's it. If the public is just filling in the gaps - "That's the frame Fed uses" without more from Wilson, then there isn't any basis for a lawsuit.
But, obviously it's different if the frames are stamped with Fed's signature (like my Pure Drive Roddick) or there are advertisements/promotional spots stating that Fed uses this frame and it's available to you at TW.
I never understood why players don't just promote a "line" of frames. "I'm Roger Federer, 17-time major winner, and I play BLX [model unspecified]. Wilson has created a line of superior frames for every level of player. Including you! Give BLX a try."
Yeah, that would be a better strategy, and legally safe. Don't know why they don't do it.
This is all interesting to me because I wrote Wilson when they first came out with the BLX model, the black and red one, and asked whether the new racquet still featured the same construction as the K version, which Wilson claimed was Fed's real racquet. The reply I got was unsatisfying, completely ignoring both direction questions about 1) braided construction and 2) Kevlar. The answered only with a quote from their marketing material, something about BLX racquets using graphite with basalt fibers, making one of the most advanced composites in the industry, or some such. I concluded at the time that they had abandoned the braided construction used for all prior versions of the Pro Staff and Tour 90 series, and that they had dropped the Kevlar. No longer a Pro Staff frame, and it didn't play like it either. The newest version of the Tour 90 is braided, according to their catalogs, but those material do not mention Kevlar.
I wonder if Wilson will try and buy FabFed's collection before they get into the plantiff's hands.