I beleive the University felt that he was making these pictures and selling them and they were not licensed by the University. I'm not sure but I think that is the jist of the suit.
Daniel Moore may not be the "man" that most of us think of him to be, but let's face it: UA wants more and more money if she can get it. Nothing wrong with updating facilities and making the place as great as it can be, but it shouldn't come at EVERYONE's expense, especially people who ALREADY HAVE REVENUE-SHARING agreements with them.
UA wants too much money. Sorry for opening up a can of worms here....
I like Daniel Moore's paintings. I don't know what kind of man he is personally, BUT...it's kinda fishy that the university let him do this for many years without saying a word, then all of a sudden they decide they want a slice of his pie :roll:
If they wanted to stop infringement, they should have sued him the first time he ever painted an Alabama picture...but no, they waited till he gained a lot of money off it.....sounds like money grubbing to me.
Daniel Moore may not be the "man" that most of us think of him to be, but let's face it: UA wants more and more money if she can get it. Nothing wrong with updating facilities and making the place as great as it can be, but it shouldn't come at EVERYONE's expense, especially people who ALREADY HAVE REVENUE-SHARING agreements with them.
UA wants too much money. Sorry for opening up a can of worms here....
There is the kicker. He was paying UA for some of the items and then stopped. He continues with the prints, but stopped on other things the prints were on.
They have a case considering he was paying them in the first place...then stopped.
No big deal on the can of worms...comes up every once in awhile...it's not like the uniform change threads. :lol:
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.