Blake's Prince PJ'd Dunlop against any laws?

[pow]

So it was common knowledge that James Blake never switched to a Prince Racquet but rather just had his Dunlop painted black with Prince on it. I was wondering if that infringes on any laws because I know I wouldn't be too happy if I was working for Dunlop.

I know you can't put another firm's brand on your products, what about putting your brand on another firm's product?

 

[ollinger]

It's not even clear that it is truly a Dunlop racquet, but may be a custom model made for James. Nonetheless there's no law preventing him from putting whatever logo he wants on it. The key point is that he's not causing any direct "injury" to Dunlop when he has a Prince logo. He can be a "billboard" for anyone willing to pay him. Endorsement of products by celebrities is ubiquitous and courts have never held them to much of a standard to show that they really use what they say they use.

 

[rooski]

Do a search. This has been discussed to death.

 

[bigfoot910]

This was a huge problem when Safin went to Dunlop from Head and was playing with a PJ'd prestige with Dunlop written all over it. Head sued and Safin went back to Head after Dunlop decided not to fight over it too much. So ya, I'd say that it was against a few rules, it is just if the company being infringed upon really cares in the slightest.

 

[johnkidd]

This was a huge problem when Safin went to Dunlop from Head and was playing with a PJ'd prestige with Dunlop written all over it. Head sued and Safin went back to Head after Dunlop decided not to fight over it too much. So ya, I'd say that it was against a few rules, it is just if the company being infringed upon really cares in the slightest.

From what little I know of product law, having Dunlop writen on a actual Head racket is misrepresenting the product. If Blakes' frame is a custom mold and made to his specs, it's not really a Dunlop. Much like when Becker bought the molds from Puma and had Estusa make the rackets for him