You may remember in April when Tanit Buday sued the Yankees because, she claimed, her uncle created the famous top hat and bat logo the team uses.
Long story short, the court wasn’t buying that either.
If you don’t recall the case, here’s the backstory:
Buday sued the team for copyright infringement because she said her uncle — graphic designer Kenneth Timur, who lived in Europe at the time — was commissioned in 1936 by the team to create a logo. He did so but was never compensated.
This part is believable. I could see the Yanks pulling a jack move like that, especially back in the day. However, the rest of the story seems fishy.
Buday said then-team owners Jacob Ruppert and Del Webb heard of Timur’s work from his sister, who worked in Brooklyn as a manicurist at the time.
The suit claims Timur was not aware that the Yanks used the logo until he immigrated to America 11 years later and was asked to revise the logo in 1952.
This is the part I don’t get. If you knew the team was juicing you and used your logo without permission/compensation, why would you agree to do more work for them?
To answer my question: Buday said Timur was hopeful that the team would offer him some kind of recognition the second time around.
Fool me once…
Crazy Lady said the reason her uncle never copyrighted his work was because he didn’t have the means to and he also trusted the Yankee owners.
tugs on suspenders Now I’m not a fancy, big-city lawyer but I’m pretty sure if you don’t copyright your work you won’t have a leg to stand on in a courtroom. Apparently Manhattan Federal Judge Deborah Batts feels the same way because she threw the case out today.
VICTORY FOR THE LITTLE GUYS!