🏈 A good thing about the NIL that's been overlooked? Daniel Moore retires.

you didnt like the new one? @TerryP
For what's it's worth...as soon as he devalued his own product by putting his prints on coffee mugs I was done with mentioning what he'd produced. When he started cheating UA out of royalites he became personna non grata. And believe you me, the person who brought that to the forefront is likely the most disliked person in UA's administation for me.
 
For what's it's worth...as soon as he devalued his own product by putting his prints on coffee mugs I was done with mentioning what he'd produced. When he started cheating UA out of royalites he became personna non grata. And believe you me, the person who brought that to the forefront is likely the most disliked person in UA's administation for me.
Yeah. That was sad state of affairs with UA
Could have been handled better by all
seems people dont like to sit n work things out.

i have a ton of his prints. More then i have room for. But he is excellent artist
Like the ones featuring plays like the Heisman one with DS


i kinda like the coffee mugs. Which he cant do anymore.

i buy way to much of this stuff.
 
For what's it's worth...as soon as he devalued his own product by putting his prints on coffee mugs I was done with mentioning what he'd produced. When he started cheating UA out of royalites he became personna non grata. And believe you me, the person who brought that to the forefront is likely the most disliked person in UA's administation for me.
He cheated UA out of royalties??

I’ve never much looked at his stuff nor have I paid attention to him
 
He cheated UA out of royalties??
Yes:

UA sued Moore for trademark violations in March 2005, alleging that he painted scenes of Crimson Tide football games without permission from the university and reissued previously licensed prints without paying royalties. The university is seeking back pay for more than 20 paintings and wants Moore to license any future paintings.
Moore denied violating federal trademark laws protecting visual art and, more importantly, claimed his art is speech protected by the U.S. Constitution.

What's interesting looking back is UA said his paintings "were too realistic and did not transform the original scene enough to constitute artistic expression." (That was his defense using the first admendment.) Since that point his quality has gone down the crapper. Ironically, about the same time he started his coffee cup's thing.

On a related note, Finus overstepped his boundary a few times, in my opinion. His actions against that bakery in Tuscaloosa were on the absurd side.
 
Yes:



What's interesting looking back is UA said his paintings "were too realistic and did not transform the original scene enough to constitute artistic expression." (That was his defense using the first admendment.) Since that point his quality has gone down the crapper. Ironically, about the same time he started his coffee cup's thing.

On a related note, Finus overstepped his boundary a few times, in my opinion. His actions against that bakery in Tuscaloosa were on the absurd side.
I’m guessing Moore decided not to do the right thing by UA? Did he ever get licensed?

Suing a bakery in Ttown is just stupid
 
Yes:



What's interesting looking back is UA said his paintings "were too realistic and did not transform the original scene enough to constitute artistic expression." (That was his defense using the first admendment.) Since that point his quality has gone down the crapper. Ironically, about the same time he started his coffee cup's thing.

On a related note, Finus overstepped his boundary a few times, in my opinion. His actions against that bakery in Tuscaloosa were on the absurd side.

Makes sense why you said the background of the DaVonta catch at LSU was different.
 
Back
Top Bottom