Wilson being sued over Clash branding

chazz

chazz

Rookie
www.bloomberg.com

Should Clash-Branded Wilson Racket Stay or Go? London Is Calling

We all know that when the late Joe Strummer fought the law, the law won.
www.bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com

We all know that when the late Joe Strummer fought the law, the law won.


Now a U.K. company that owns the rights to the trademark for the legendary punk band the Clash, which Strummer fronted, is asking a court in California to hold Wilson Sporting Goods to account for selling tennis rackets using the band’s mark without permission.
Click to expand...
 
sredna42

sredna42

Hall of Fame
Dim Sim said:
It’s first past the post. Registering a trade mark entitles you to prevent others using the same mark: you get the sole right to economically exploit the mark by selling goods and services with it (or licensing others to do the same). You register the mark in various classes and in the countries where you will use the mark (and need protection against competing use of the mark). But it’s use it or lose it: if you register a mark and never use it for the class of goods or services then you can be stripped of the mark. Anyone half interested could find out what trademarks The Clash (or its publisher) has by searching the national IP register for the words THE CLASH.
Click to expand...
If they are a band, surely they can only gain protection in a musical context. Wtf do the clash, some chitty godawful band, listened to by dirty drug fcked hipsters stoners or whatever, have to do with tennis or any sport. Maybe just go trademarking every word on the English language. Ridiculous situation
 
FourOutOfFive

FourOutOfFive

Rookie
fed1 said:
Such as?? I’d love to hear.
Click to expand...

Claims such as “the most flexible racquet ever made” are just stupid. The way their reps go around touting their “clash technology” is pretty insufferable as well, and their complete lack of actual racquet knowledge is pretty insulting to the consumer imo.

A couple weeks ago, somebody commented on Wilson’s Instagram something along the lines of “Hey, which pros use the Clash?” I’m going to copy and paste their response:

“Gibbs, Gasparyan, and Potapova are using the Clash Tour. Since the Clash is so different than any racquet on tour, most of our players need more time to playtest due to the drastic change in specs. Usually Tour players only make very small changes in their gear. Since tennis season is in full swing, they do not have “off time” to fully playtest the frame. We should see more players start to switch in the future, especially Next Gen players.”

Condescending much?

Next up, there’s the Instagram Ambassadors. Oh boy. They all say the same goddamn thing about their Wilson racquets which is absolutely nothing. They have the occasional giveaway (the only reason they have followers) and then the weekly pic of the whole gang of Wilson racquet lines asking which one is the best. When a new racquet comes out, they set up a little video review where they talk about all the spin, power and control they get and how they’re dramatically better players because of it. The best thing is, all these glorified ads are paid under the table and there’s no advertisement disclaimer that is supposed to be required by Instagram in the first place. It’s very bad when brands pay people to generate positive reviews. Obviously, to anyone who’s around the racquet business it’s pretty obvious what these videos actually are, however there are people out there that 100% believe this stuff and are getting taken advantage of imho.

I know I’m being a tad petty and a lot of people aren’t going to care anyways but no other brand goes to these lengths to shove their racquets down the consumer’s throat. They even go as far to give “Ambassador” status to kids whose parents are clearly trying to use their account to make money. The content is just plain horrific and so freaking half-assed.

That’s covers just about all my current gripes with Wilson. Obviously racquet marketing has been pretty s**t for a while now but the marketing team in Chicago or wherever the hell they are are taking this to new levels of stupidity.
 
Last edited:
F

fed1

Professional
FourOutOfFive said:
Claims such as “the most flexible racquet ever made” are just stupid. The way their reps go around touting their “clash technology” is pretty insufferable as well, and their complete lack of actual racquet knowledge is pretty insulting to the consumer imo.

A couple weeks ago, somebody commented on Wilson’s Instagram something along the lines of “Hey, which pros use the Clash?” I’m going to copy and paste their response:

“Gibbs, Gasparyan, and Potapova are using the Clash Tour. Since the Clash is so different than any racquet on tour, most of our players need more time to playtest due to the drastic change in specs. Usually Tour players only make very small changes in their gear. Since tennis season is in full swing, they do not have “off time” to fully playtest the frame. We should see more players start to switch in the future, especially Next Gen players.”

Condescending much?

Next up, there’s the Instagram Ambassadors. Oh boy. They all say the same goddamn thing about their Wilson racquets which is absolutely nothing. They have the occasional giveaway (the only reason they have followers) and then the weekly pic of the whole gang of Wilson racquet lines asking which one is the best. When a new racquet comes out, they set up a little video review where they talk about all the spin, power and control they get and how they’re dramatically better players because of it. The best thing is, all these glorified ads are paid under the table and there’s no advertisement disclaimer that is supposed to be required by Instagram in the first place. It’s very bad when brands pay people to generate positive reviews. Obviously, to anyone who’s around the racquet business it’s pretty obvious what these videos actually are, however there are people out there that 100% believe this stuff and are getting taken advantage of imho.

I know I’m being a tad petty and a lot of people aren’t going to care anyways but no other brand goes to these lengths to shove their racquets down the consumer’s throat. They even go as far to give “Ambassador” status to kids whose parents are clearly trying to use their account to make money. The content is just plain horrific and so freaking half-assed.

That’s covers just about all my current gripes with Wilson. Obviously racquet marketing has been pretty s**t for a while now but the marketing team in Chicago or wherever the hell they are are taking this to new levels of stupidity.
Click to expand...

I have no idea to fully respond to this rambling mess which pretty clearly comes off loud and clear as “I don’t like Wilson” rant but I’ll try.
First, the claims about the technology, the technology of the racquet is completely different than anything that’s out there, that’s not opinion, it’s fact. Reps from other companies acknowledge this. Wilson says that they measure stiffness on their SI index and using that index they its the most flexible racquet CURRENTLY on the market.
Second issue being the tour players, there wasn’t significant time to get in testing last season. Their response is actually pretty accurate to how things go so that’s clearly your issue. Just because it doesn’t fit your narrative doesn’t mean it’s wrong. You may want to check the definition of condescending.
The rest of the rant is just opinion, nothing based in fact.
Ultimately the consumer is the one who speaks loudest and for the first time in many, many years Babolat no longer holds the 1 and 2 spots in racquet sales, those spots now belong to Clash.
 
FourOutOfFive

FourOutOfFive

Rookie
fed1 said:
I have no idea to fully respond to this rambling mess which pretty clearly comes off loud and clear as “I don’t like Wilson” rant but I’ll try.
First, the claims about the technology, the technology of the racquet is completely different than anything that’s out there, that’s not opinion, it’s fact. Reps from other companies acknowledge this. Wilson says that they measure stiffness on their SI index and using that index they its the most flexible racquet CURRENTLY on the market.
Second issue being the tour players, there wasn’t significant time to get in testing last season. Their response is actually pretty accurate to how things go so that’s clearly your issue. Just because it doesn’t fit your narrative doesn’t mean it’s wrong. You may want to check the definition of condescending.
The rest of the rant is just opinion, nothing based in fact.
Ultimately the consumer is the one who speaks loudest and for the first time in many, many years Babolat no longer holds the 1 and 2 spots in racquet sales, those spots now belong to Clash.
Click to expand...


Hey, you’re not wrong that my post is a bit of a mess. It was a quick write-up on my phone and I didn’t take that much time to format or edit it properly. It definitely turned out to be a rant.

I don’t have a personal vendetta against Wilson at all, I just dislike their marketing practices. I am actually playing with the new V7 Blades and think they’re awesome racquets. I also don’t hate the Clash, it’s just not “my” type of racquet. I definitely appreciate Wilson for reigniting the market for flexible frames and I never said that Wilson’s marketing isn’t working, it definitely is.

I used the word condescending to describe Wilson’s marketing because I believe they treat the consumer as if they’re stupid. Hopefully I was able to get that point across in my previous post. The marketing for the Clash was unlike any racquet campaign in the past, and I think Wilson’s aggressiveness pushed a crap-ton of sales when the racquet first released. I know a lot of people personally who bought the racquet without even demoing it because they were so excited to try it. That’s good marketing (from a sales perspective) for sure!

The way you wrote your response leads me to believe you either really like the Clash or you work/ed for Wilson. The Clash demoes first started popping up late last year if I remember properly. If pros really liked the racquet they would have had plenty of time to switch while they were still in the off-season. This year, we will probably see more playing with it, but it will either be a paint job or they’re getting paid off to guarantee more sales. I guess that’s my opinion though so don’t take too much offense over it. Also, what the heck is the SI index? Is it the same as RA? Why wouldn’t Wilson just use the same measurements that everybody else does? Again, I acknowledge that’s more of a personal opinion of mine than a valid (in your mind anyway) case against Wilson’s marketing. I am also not a marketing expert.

The guy with the post above you mentioned Wilson’s bad QC as well, which is funny, because Wilson literally marketed on their website that there would only be a +-5 gram variance for the V7 Blade racquets. First off, it’s worth noting that is still a pretty serious QC problem and there’s no reason to advertise that. Secondly, the claim is complete BS, because users in the Blade threads have reported the same old wildly varying spec differences as usual.

Hopefully my response is a bit more organized for you. I want to say one last time that I understand some of my points are merely my own personal opinion. I’m all for having civil discussion!
 
flanker2000fr

flanker2000fr

Hall of Fame
TennisManiac said:
The only thing Wilson should be sued over is their horrendous QC. Hey.... I have an idea :unsure:
Click to expand...

Yes, it's interesting that they went from being the standard bearer in the industry for QC, when they had the St Vincent factory, to arguably the worst QC of any major brand. But hey, it doesn't matter as long as Fed and countless other pros push their products.
 
FourOutOfFive

FourOutOfFive

Rookie
diddyac said:
Not trying to be rude, but you make absolutely no sense - There isn't even one single way you can interpret that reply from Wilson to be condescending no matter how you try to splice it - what they said is completely true. A simple question was asked, and the answer supplied was more than accurate. You don't know if the person who asked the question was a complete newbie at tennis or not, so how can you judge based off a short reply, without considering any context?



Yes The Clash was marketed well, but most of what they said in adverts was not even close to a blatant lie, it was plenty different to many racquets in the last 15 years, and it was extremely flexible as advertised. If you actually played with the Clash, you would know the way the racquet flexes feels quite different to other flexy racquets, and if compared to what the current market was producing for the last 10 years, it was very definitely something different. But it comes down to personal preference. A person who prefers stiffer racquets won't like the Clash, it goes the same for every racquet available, so what?

Clash by no means was greatest racquet ever, I've even sold mine now, but something very positive they did do was push the racquet market back into producing higher quality products, such as the Head Gravity and Yonex Vcore HD

A business is there to maximize sales, from a business standpoint, they did a fantastic job, if you hate on that, well you might aswell talk sh*t about every business on the market



You saying that you think he works for Wilson or really likes the Clash, is like me saying, you must work for Babolat or you must really love Pure Drives, because you keep badmouthing Clash/Wilson. Do you see that makes absolutely no logical sense? you're just making a straw-man argument by this stage

Also, how did pros have plenty of time to switch to the Clash in the off-season? The official Clash launched this year in February 2019 - the new season starts in January 2020. Even if you account for early play testers, that was happening in January 2019. There hasn't been an off-season since the Clash was introduced to market.
Click to expand...

Well, at this point you've essentially proven that I'm an idiot. I've spent the last few minutes trying to think of a way to defend myself but there's really no point. You've essentially proven that I have no idea what I'm talking about, and after seeing this I'm not quite sure how my own brain comprehends things. Naturally, I don't want to appear submissive, but you legitimately proved that my entire argument was based off my own stupidity and suppressed anger from God-knows-where. Obviously I have no idea how basic marketing works nor do I possess any reading comprehension.

No, I'm not being sarcastic either.

I know this is going to sound tremendously edgy, but, I'd like to thank you for delivering me the online ass-kicking of the year. Hopefully I can learn something from this exchange, and maybe next time I try to prove a point I'll actually to able to concoct a convincing argument.
 
mad dog1

mad dog1

G.O.A.T.
FourOutOfFive said:
Hey, you’re not wrong that my post is a bit of a mess. It was a quick write-up on my phone and I didn’t take that much time to format or edit it properly. It definitely turned out to be a rant.

I don’t have a personal vendetta against Wilson at all, I just dislike their marketing practices. I am actually playing with the new V7 Blades and think they’re awesome racquets. I also don’t hate the Clash, it’s just not “my” type of racquet. I definitely appreciate Wilson for reigniting the market for flexible frames and I never said that Wilson’s marketing isn’t working, it definitely is.

I used the word condescending to describe Wilson’s marketing because I believe they treat the consumer as if they’re stupid. Hopefully I was able to get that point across in my previous post. The marketing for the Clash was unlike any racquet campaign in the past, and I think Wilson’s aggressiveness pushed a crap-ton of sales when the racquet first released. I know a lot of people personally who bought the racquet without even demoing it because they were so excited to try it. That’s good marketing (from a sales perspective) for sure!

The way you wrote your response leads me to believe you either really like the Clash or you work/ed for Wilson. The Clash demoes first started popping up late last year if I remember properly. If pros really liked the racquet they would have had plenty of time to switch while they were still in the off-season. This year, we will probably see more playing with it, but it will either be a paint job or they’re getting paid off to guarantee more sales. I guess that’s my opinion though so don’t take too much offense over it. Also, what the heck is the SI index? Is it the same as RA? Why wouldn’t Wilson just use the same measurements that everybody else does? Again, I acknowledge that’s more of a personal opinion of mine than a valid (in your mind anyway) case against Wilson’s marketing. I am also not a marketing expert.

The guy with the post above you mentioned Wilson’s bad QC as well, which is funny, because Wilson literally marketed on their website that there would only be a +-5 gram variance for the V7 Blade racquets. First off, it’s worth noting that is still a pretty serious QC problem and there’s no reason to advertise that. Secondly, the claim is complete BS, because users in the Blade threads have reported the same old wildly varying spec differences as usual.

Hopefully my response is a bit more organized for you. I want to say one last time that I understand some of my points are merely my own personal opinion. I’m all for having civil discussion!
Click to expand...
And what did you think of Babolat’s marketing of Graphite Tungsten?
 
G

GBplayer

Hall of Fame
sredna42 said:
If they are a band, surely they can only gain protection in a musical context. Wtf do the clash, some chitty godawful band, listened to by dirty drug fcked hipsters stoners or whatever, have to do with tennis or any sport. Maybe just go trademarking every word on the English language. Ridiculous situation
Click to expand...
The Clash were against drugs, as were other early punk bands. They didn't like drug taking hippies.

" Never trust a hippie. "
 
toby55555

toby55555

Hall of Fame
sredna42 said:
If they are a band, surely they can only gain protection in a musical context. Wtf do the clash, some chitty godawful band, listened to by dirty drug fcked hipsters stoners or whatever, have to do with tennis or any sport. Maybe just go trademarking every word on the English language. Ridiculous situation
Click to expand...
But Dorismo are in the Sports business apparently.
 
beltsman

beltsman

G.O.A.T.
fed1 said:
I have no idea to fully respond to this rambling mess which pretty clearly comes off loud and clear as “I don’t like Wilson” rant but I’ll try.
First, the claims about the technology, the technology of the racquet is completely different than anything that’s out there, that’s not opinion, it’s fact. Reps from other companies acknowledge this. Wilson says that they measure stiffness on their SI index and using that index they its the most flexible racquet CURRENTLY on the market.
Second issue being the tour players, there wasn’t significant time to get in testing last season. Their response is actually pretty accurate to how things go so that’s clearly your issue. Just because it doesn’t fit your narrative doesn’t mean it’s wrong. You may want to check the definition of condescending.
The rest of the rant is just opinion, nothing based in fact.
Ultimately the consumer is the one who speaks loudest and for the first time in many, many years Babolat no longer holds the 1 and 2 spots in racquet sales, those spots now belong to Clash.
Click to expand...

I have nothing for or against Wilson or Clash (haven't hit with Clash and I don't pay attention to the marketing), but you do come off as a Wilson shill even if you don't intend to.

Where from did you get the racquet sales rankings? Citation?
 
F

fed1

Professional
beltsman said:
I have nothing for or against Wilson or Clash (haven't hit with Clash and I don't pay attention to the marketing), but you do come off as a Wilson shill even if you don't intend to.

Where from did you get the racquet sales rankings? Citation?
Click to expand...

July issue of Tennis Industry Magazine. Clash Tour was number 4 , not 2, my mistake. Clash was number 1, knocking out the Pure Drive which had been in the top spot forever.
 
C

chrisb

Professional
Wilson sued Yamaha back in the day about string patterns or some other BS because the Secret 4 was stealing thunder from their brand . So at one level turnabout is fair play. Second I demoed the clashes and found them to be inferior rackets as I do most Wilson frames the profile which they bought from a German guy was unique the pro staff line is a dependable racket and the open pro which I see is in remake was a passable frame the rest IMO are inferior. I note that their have been some players frames that are still talked about on this site that are from the distant past. I wonder how many of the current frames will stand up the test of time. My persona thought is none
 
D

DTennis3

Rookie
fed1 said:
July issue of Tennis Industry Magazine. Clash Tour was number 4 , not 2, my mistake. Clash was number 1, knocking out the Pure Drive which had been in the top spot forever.
Click to expand...

I pulled that issue online and those numbers were Jan-March. Unfortunately the marketing hype was short lived as the Pure Aero regained number 1 immediately following with the Clash 100 at 2 and the Pure Drive at 3.
 
BHud

BHud

Hall of Fame
fundrazer said:
What is it with people in the internet age having zero clue about trademarks/copyrights/IP rights?

And The Clash is/are a great band, and I'm no hipster stoner.
Click to expand...
Stoner, maybe...hipster, hells no? The Clash rolled in the late '70s, far before any hipsters were squirted into their mums' bellies. I was lucky enough to be in college then - was able to fully partake in the rebellion!
 
S

Steve Huff

G.O.A.T.
Wilson sued Prince a while back also, regarding the Perimeter Weighting System. Wilson won the case, forced Prince to quit advertising the Triple Threat, even though the bulges were in completely different places.
 
R

ron schaap

Hall of Fame
Dim Sim said:
It’s first past the post. Registering a trade mark entitles you to prevent others using the same mark: you get the sole right to economically exploit the mark by selling goods and services with it (or licensing others to do the same). You register the mark in various classes and in the countries where you will use the mark (and need protection against competing use of the mark). But it’s use it or lose it: if you register a mark and never use it for the class of goods or services then you can be stripped of the mark. Anyone half interested could find out what trademarks The Clash (or its publisher) has by searching the national IP register for the words THE CLASH.
Click to expand...
I ve searched the registers before but now i m not bothered. A pop band is not even close to a tennis racquet, so must be in different classes. Then if the name is only protected in USA, then Wilson could still use it abroad.
Anyway Cash would be a better name for this racquetl because its not cheap, or would a certain Johny complain then? ;)
 
Crocodile

Crocodile

G.O.A.T.
I'm surprised Dunlop hasn't been held to account for their ISIS handle system in their Force range of racquets.
 
netlets

netlets

Professional
diddyac said:
Not trying to be rude, but you make absolutely no sense - There isn't even one single way you can interpret that reply from Wilson to be condescending no matter how you try to splice it - what they said is completely true. A simple question was asked, and the answer supplied was more than accurate. You don't know if the person who asked the question was a complete newbie at tennis or not, so how can you judge based off a short reply, without considering any context?



Yes The Clash was marketed well, but most of what they said in adverts was not even close to a blatant lie, it was plenty different to many racquets in the last 15 years, and it was extremely flexible as advertised. If you actually played with the Clash, you would know the way the racquet flexes feels quite different to other flexy racquets, and if compared to what the current market was producing for the last 10 years, it was very definitely something different. But it comes down to personal preference. A person who prefers stiffer racquets won't like the Clash, it goes the same for every racquet available, so what?

Clash by no means was greatest racquet ever, I've even sold mine now, but something very positive they did do was push the racquet market back into producing higher quality products, such as the Head Gravity and Yonex Vcore HD

A business is there to maximize sales, from a business standpoint, they did a fantastic job, if you hate on that, well you might aswell talk sh*t about every business on the market



You saying that you think he works for Wilson or really likes the Clash, is like me saying, you must work for Babolat or you must really love Pure Drives, because you keep badmouthing Clash/Wilson. Do you see that makes absolutely no logical sense? you're just making a straw-man argument by this stage

Also, how did pros have plenty of time to switch to the Clash in the off-season? The official Clash launched this year in February 2019 - the new season starts in January 2020. Even if you account for early play testers, that was happening in January 2019. There hasn't been an off-season since the Clash was introduced to market.
Click to expand...

By the way, the Clash is absolutely targeted to people that use stiff racquets as they are going after the Pure Drive people by calling it the Pure Drive killer. The racquet is called the Clash because it is flexible and comfortable but also stable and powerful. These attributes have not been found in the same racquet previously. It plays like a soft Pure Drive - Which I have been using for 15 years until I just switched. My shoulder is very happy and I really feel comfortable with the Clash 100 Tour. It is designed for the modern swing path, so flat hitters may not like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top