Comments on: ARE THE BENGALS BULLIES OR GOOD BUSINESSMEN? http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/ The Best Pro Football Scoop on the Internet Sun, 12 Oct 2008 23:59:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Vox Veritas http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-26214 Vox Veritas Thu, 08 May 2008 15:19:38 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-26214 The Bengals don't have a GM. They have a "president", who not coincidentally also happens to be the "owner". Funny that it's Jerry Jones that catches all the flack for doing double duty like that, in spite of the fact that Brown was born into his position, and Jones got to where he is the old fashioned way. He worked his ass off, gathered up his nickels, mortgaged himself to the facelift scars and bought a team. Then went out and won as many Super Bowls in 7 years as the Bengals have winning seasons in the last 21 years. The Bengals don’t have a GM. They have a “president”, who not coincidentally also happens to be the “owner”. Funny that it’s Jerry Jones that catches all the flack for doing double duty like that, in spite of the fact that Brown was born into his position, and Jones got to where he is the old fashioned way. He worked his ass off, gathered up his nickels, mortgaged himself to the facelift scars and bought a team. Then went out and won as many Super Bowls in 7 years as the Bengals have winning seasons in the last 21 years.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: JJMeeker http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-26152 JJMeeker Thu, 08 May 2008 13:50:51 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-26152 Name me one entity that allows its respective trademark/copyright to be published/commerced without its explicit permission and/or financial agreement Name me one entity that allows its respective trademark/copyright to be published/commerced without its explicit permission and/or financial agreement

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: Tenolein http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25994 Tenolein Thu, 08 May 2008 06:04:25 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25994 So, a fan site can't use a logo of the team they are covering or blogging? Even if they have given the team credit for the copyrighted logo? Yes, it's smart business for them to cover their bases. I'm not denying that. But it is RETARDED.. Let me repeat.. WE-TODD-DID to go after, legally, a fan site/blog. Cut a deal with them by giving them written permission, which, by the way, they refused to after stripehype.com's blogger asked for mulitple times. The Bengals organization, GM and up, all need replacing. Now. So, a fan site can’t use a logo of the team they are covering or blogging? Even if they have given the team credit for the copyrighted logo?

Yes, it’s smart business for them to cover their bases. I’m not denying that. But it is RETARDED.. Let me repeat.. WE-TODD-DID to go after, legally, a fan site/blog. Cut a deal with them by giving them written permission, which, by the way, they refused to after stripehype.com’s blogger asked for mulitple times.

The Bengals organization, GM and up, all need replacing.

Now.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: bubba http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25859 bubba Thu, 08 May 2008 02:32:35 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25859 It's fun to make funny's regarding the Bengals. But, The Bengals have been the ohe Super Bowl. Let's see, that puts them above the Cards (Who are the all time Low), The Lions (Who compete in the SuperBowl of Suck with the Cards), New Orleans, Houston, CLeveland and Jacksonville. Jacksonville being the best out of those but we have no clue how long they will be in Jacksonville. So to some it up, Even though the Bengals are to be laughed at, It isn't the franchise as much as it is the management. So lets make less fun of the Bengals and turn to those franchises that deserve it. That means you Az, DET, H-Town, and Cleveland. New Orleans' Katrina exemption is running out by the way. It’s fun to make funny’s regarding the Bengals. But, The Bengals have been the ohe Super Bowl. Let’s see, that puts them above the Cards (Who are the all time Low), The Lions (Who compete in the SuperBowl of Suck with the Cards), New Orleans, Houston, CLeveland and Jacksonville. Jacksonville being the best out of those but we have no clue how long they will be in Jacksonville. So to some it up, Even though the Bengals are to be laughed at, It isn’t the franchise as much as it is the management. So lets make less fun of the Bengals and turn to those franchises that deserve it. That means you Az, DET, H-Town, and Cleveland. New Orleans’ Katrina exemption is running out by the way.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: aj http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25751 aj Thu, 08 May 2008 00:11:52 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25751 This has happened more than people realize. This has happened more than people realize.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: wingnut http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25749 wingnut Thu, 08 May 2008 00:10:14 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25749 Sounds like the NFL as a hole...I said hole. Sounds like the NFL as a hole…I said hole.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: zzzteve http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25742 zzzteve Thu, 08 May 2008 00:01:43 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25742 Maybe someone can explain this to me, but the article I viewed is dated 1-5-2001. That's 7.5 years ago. Has this been dragging on this long or am I missing something? Maybe someone can explain this to me, but the article I viewed is dated 1-5-2001. That’s 7.5 years ago. Has this been dragging on this long or am I missing something?

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: kliquid http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25732 kliquid Wed, 07 May 2008 23:40:26 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25732 So, I'm kind of confused... If ProFootballTalk doesn't use NFL logos and such, how can the "Pic of the Day" stuff be legal? Aren't the photos also NFL property? Or how does that work? So, I’m kind of confused… If ProFootballTalk doesn’t use NFL logos and such, how can the “Pic of the Day” stuff be legal? Aren’t the photos also NFL property? Or how does that work?

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: FloriosPhillyFan http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25720 FloriosPhillyFan Wed, 07 May 2008 23:01:18 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25720 Mike Brown shouldn't have to deal with this crap. This isn't what he bargained for. Mike Brown shouldn’t have to deal with this crap. This isn’t what he bargained for.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: bondem777 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25706 bondem777 Wed, 07 May 2008 22:50:58 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25706 While you are correct about the Bengals legal rights, you are wrong about the uniforms. They rock! While you are correct about the Bengals legal rights, you are wrong about the uniforms. They rock!

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: brian_21 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25704 brian_21 Wed, 07 May 2008 22:46:04 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25704 All of this is above my head ... I want to be a professional journalist, but my parents insist I go to law school. (More money at the latter, more fulfillment from the former? What to do, what to do.) If I do the latter, I can understand what I just read! But I actually agree that the Cincinnati Bengals are doing the right thing here. All of this is above my head …

I want to be a professional journalist, but my parents insist I go to law school. (More money at the latter, more fulfillment from the former? What to do, what to do.) If I do the latter, I can understand what I just read!

But I actually agree that the Cincinnati Bengals are doing the right thing here.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: Mike D http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25674 Mike D Wed, 07 May 2008 21:41:56 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25674 Wonder if the Bengals would consider dropping the issue alltogether if the site operators would....I don't know....go out and beat up a pregnant woman? Wonder if the Bengals would consider dropping the issue alltogether if the site operators would….I don’t know….go out and beat up a pregnant woman?

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: Vox Veritas http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25653 Vox Veritas Wed, 07 May 2008 21:06:22 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25653 Too bad the Bengals don't exert as much effort on the football side of the operation as they do the "let's do everything we can to protect our ability to line that blight on the NFL Mike Brown's pockets" side of the operation. Too bad the Bengals don’t exert as much effort on the football side of the operation as they do the “let’s do everything we can to protect our ability to line that blight on the NFL Mike Brown’s pockets” side of the operation.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: DC_Bengals_Fan http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25648 DC_Bengals_Fan Wed, 07 May 2008 21:02:16 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25648 "Hey DC_Bengals_Fan, I’m no expert either, but wouldn’t the Bengal’s logo count as a trademark, and not a copyright? I’m thinking this is a trademark issue that has simply been mis-named by the author of the original article as a copyright issue." Yes. Sorry, they definitely would be required to remove the trademarked logos, but the photos would be a different matter. If requested, they would have to remove any photos that the Bengals team owns the copyrights to (for example, if a team employee took the pictures). Other rights holders would be able to exert their rights for the pictures, which the author very mistakenly called "in the public domain". But there's no risk at all of losing their copyrights to the photos. I agree with you, there was probably confusion regarding trademark/copyright. But if photos were mentioned, then they must be claiming both. And that's where Florio's justification of it falls flat. Here's another reason why it might not make sense for the Bengals to attack the site: Trademarks are usually lost because they become generic. This happens when people start using a term like "kleenex" to represent any paper hanky, or "coke" to mean anything brown and fizzy. So let's say a college team started using the Bengals' logo on the helmets. That would be on the road to dilution, becoming generic, because it associates the logo with something other than the NFL Bengals. However, here the site is using the Bengals logo as a representation of the Bengals team, which is exactly what the logo is for. As such, it's hard to argue that there would be real risk in letting the site use the logo because that use doesn't make it generic, it keeps it specific. If that's the case, then the Bengals have every right to make them stop, but there was probably no risk at all in letting them use it. In this case, I think the legal department just operated on autopilot without actually thinking. But I'm no lawyer. Maybe if a resident IP lawyer happens to stroll by we can get a real expert to weigh in. “Hey DC_Bengals_Fan, I’m no expert either, but wouldn’t the Bengal’s logo count as a trademark, and not a copyright? I’m thinking this is a trademark issue that has simply been mis-named by the author of the original article as a copyright issue.”

Yes. Sorry, they definitely would be required to remove the trademarked logos, but the photos would be a different matter. If requested, they would have to remove any photos that the Bengals team owns the copyrights to (for example, if a team employee took the pictures). Other rights holders would be able to exert their rights for the pictures, which the author very mistakenly called “in the public domain”. But there’s no risk at all of losing their copyrights to the photos.

I agree with you, there was probably confusion regarding trademark/copyright. But if photos were mentioned, then they must be claiming both. And that’s where Florio’s justification of it falls flat.

Here’s another reason why it might not make sense for the Bengals to attack the site:

Trademarks are usually lost because they become generic. This happens when people start using a term like “kleenex” to represent any paper hanky, or “coke” to mean anything brown and fizzy. So let’s say a college team started using the Bengals’ logo on the helmets. That would be on the road to dilution, becoming generic, because it associates the logo with something other than the NFL Bengals. However, here the site is using the Bengals logo as a representation of the Bengals team, which is exactly what the logo is for. As such, it’s hard to argue that there would be real risk in letting the site use the logo because that use doesn’t make it generic, it keeps it specific. If that’s the case, then the Bengals have every right to make them stop, but there was probably no risk at all in letting them use it.

In this case, I think the legal department just operated on autopilot without actually thinking. But I’m no lawyer. Maybe if a resident IP lawyer happens to stroll by we can get a real expert to weigh in.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: FinfanJim http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25641 FinfanJim Wed, 07 May 2008 20:52:21 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25641 Same thing is happening within the Ford (FoMoCo) domain. They have cracked down on websites and businesses that have Ford or any trademarked Ford item in their name. They even went so far as to attempt to shut down the production of a calendar from a Ford Mustang Cobra fan club because there were Ford logos on the cars pictured. Same thing is happening within the Ford (FoMoCo) domain. They have cracked down on websites and businesses that have Ford or any trademarked Ford item in their name. They even went so far as to attempt to shut down the production of a calendar from a Ford Mustang Cobra fan club because there were Ford logos on the cars pictured.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: AKBengalfan1 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25635 AKBengalfan1 Wed, 07 May 2008 20:45:49 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25635 Who are you to judge the Bengals and to make fun of them. If they own the copyright then they have every right to go after who ever infringes up on it. As a Bengal fan they might have gone about it a different way, then again they might have contacted them and was given someone who didn't care. We truly don't know what went on behind the scenes and to judge them or to make a report with out all the facts is poor reporting. Who are you to judge the Bengals and to make fun of them. If they own the copyright then they have every right to go after who ever infringes up on it. As a Bengal fan they might have gone about it a different way, then again they might have contacted them and was given someone who didn’t care. We truly don’t know what went on behind the scenes and to judge them or to make a report with out all the facts is poor reporting.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: Walrus http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25631 Walrus Wed, 07 May 2008 20:39:13 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25631 Speaking of Coke®... http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2001/d2001-0618.html Speaking of Coke®…

http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2001/d2001-0618.html

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: Rhode http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25630 Rhode Wed, 07 May 2008 20:38:10 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25630 Hey DC_Bengals_Fan, I'm no expert either, but wouldn't the Bengal's logo count as a trademark, and not a copyright? I'm thinking this is a trademark issue that has simply been mis-named by the author of the original article as a copyright issue. Quote from the article: "This also means that I cannot give away the Utecht Jersey. My apologies for all of you who were commenting and posting in order to win it. A privately owned jersey, autographed by the player on his own time, and because I’m promoting it as “a Cincinnati Bengals Jersey” I have been accused of copyright infringement for using their trademarked name. " Hey DC_Bengals_Fan, I’m no expert either, but wouldn’t the Bengal’s logo count as a trademark, and not a copyright? I’m thinking this is a trademark issue that has simply been mis-named by the author of the original article as a copyright issue.

Quote from the article:

“This also means that I cannot give away the Utecht Jersey. My apologies for all of you who were commenting and posting in order to win it. A privately owned jersey, autographed by the player on his own time, and because I’m promoting it as “a Cincinnati Bengals Jersey” I have been accused of copyright infringement for using their trademarked name. “

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: empty13 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25621 empty13 Wed, 07 May 2008 20:20:49 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25621 didnt texas a&m go after the seahawks over the "12th man" trademark ? didnt texas a&m go after the seahawks over the “12th man” trademark ?

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: DC_Bengals_Fan http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25620 DC_Bengals_Fan Wed, 07 May 2008 20:19:58 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25620 "it’s our understanding that if a company that owns a copyright is aware that someone is infringing on the protection and fails to act, the copyright could be jeopardized." Totally, completely, 100% wrong. I'm not a lawyer but I'm in an industry where intellectual property is a fairly important thing. People - evidently lawyers, too - mess this up all the time. The "defend or lose" thing only applies to *trademarks* that can become generic. Think "kleenex" or "coke". Copyrights, on the other hand, *can NOT* be jeopardized by a lack of defense. Copyrights are automatically generated simply by creating content, and they are not lost unless sold or until they run out (which takes a helluva long time). Additionally, they simply can't become generic because copyrights apply very narrowly to the specific work that was created - so there's no way something can become generic. For instance, this post is copyrighted by me. If you copy it, I can make you stop. If I choose not to so, that doesn't mean that my work falls into the public domain. I can selectively enforce it as much as I want. Bottom line is, the Bengals' legal department has decided to be a bunch of asshats. And as a fan of the team, I have one more thing to be disgusted about this year. “it’s our understanding that if a company that owns a copyright is aware that someone is infringing on the protection and fails to act, the copyright could be jeopardized.”

Totally, completely, 100% wrong. I’m not a lawyer but I’m in an industry where intellectual property is a fairly important thing. People - evidently lawyers, too - mess this up all the time. The “defend or lose” thing only applies to *trademarks* that can become generic. Think “kleenex” or “coke”.

Copyrights, on the other hand, *can NOT* be jeopardized by a lack of defense. Copyrights are automatically generated simply by creating content, and they are not lost unless sold or until they run out (which takes a helluva long time). Additionally, they simply can’t become generic because copyrights apply very narrowly to the specific work that was created - so there’s no way something can become generic.

For instance, this post is copyrighted by me. If you copy it, I can make you stop. If I choose not to so, that doesn’t mean that my work falls into the public domain. I can selectively enforce it as much as I want.

Bottom line is, the Bengals’ legal department has decided to be a bunch of asshats. And as a fan of the team, I have one more thing to be disgusted about this year.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: Lawdog http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25615 Lawdog Wed, 07 May 2008 20:04:24 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25615 I assisted a similar blogger when my beloved Steelers came after his site. Ultimately, he heeded my encouragement and went to the Post-Gazette who published a very pro-blogger story on the dispute. Ultimately, the two worked together to resolve their differences and both the Steelers and the blogger have operated well together since the incident. Here is the link: http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/columnists/20010329thebig.asp I assisted a similar blogger when my beloved Steelers came after his site. Ultimately, he heeded my encouragement and went to the Post-Gazette who published a very pro-blogger story on the dispute. Ultimately, the two worked together to resolve their differences and both the Steelers and the blogger have operated well together since the incident.

Here is the link:

http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/columnists/20010329thebig.asp

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: fbfan http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25613 fbfan Wed, 07 May 2008 19:53:51 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25613 Not at the NFL level, but a few years ago the University of Miami sued a high school that used the U as its logo. Not at the NFL level, but a few years ago the University of Miami sued a high school that used the U as its logo.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: empty13 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25612 empty13 Wed, 07 May 2008 19:52:27 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25612 this is merely a business doing its business. u could expect campbell soup or p&g to do the same thing. this is merely a business doing its business. u could expect campbell soup or p&g to do the same thing.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: bengalred http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25610 bengalred Wed, 07 May 2008 19:45:37 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25610 Subtle and smooth. Never two of the Bengals' strengths. Subtle and smooth. Never two of the Bengals’ strengths.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: theskarekr0w http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25608 theskarekr0w Wed, 07 May 2008 19:44:31 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25608 they are within their rights completely, and since when has a pro team actually cared what their fans thought. and they probably arent saying good things... they are within their rights completely, and since when has a pro team actually cared what their fans thought. and they probably arent saying good things…

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: Colinito http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25602 Colinito Wed, 07 May 2008 19:29:09 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25602 "it’s our understanding that if a company that owns a copyright is aware that someone is infringing on the protection and fails to act, the copyright could be jeopardized." Not a lawyer, but believe this is true. The rock band Phish sued a fan-based clothing manufacturer for copyright infringement, and the t-shirt maker promptly gave the judge a picture of the drummer wearing one of his "Glide" shirts. The judge thereafter asked the band's lawyers, "I don't understand, is the band for or against the t-shirts?" Bottom line is I agree, you've got to aggressively protect your copyrights or risk, at the least, sending the wrong impression to others with a mind to do the same. “it’s our understanding that if a company that owns a copyright is aware that someone is infringing on the protection and fails to act, the copyright could be jeopardized.”

Not a lawyer, but believe this is true. The rock band Phish sued a fan-based clothing manufacturer for copyright infringement, and the t-shirt maker promptly gave the judge a picture of the drummer wearing one of his “Glide” shirts. The judge thereafter asked the band’s lawyers, “I don’t understand, is the band for or against the t-shirts?”

Bottom line is I agree, you’ve got to aggressively protect your copyrights or risk, at the least, sending the wrong impression to others with a mind to do the same.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: gobearsgo http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25600 gobearsgo Wed, 07 May 2008 19:28:07 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25600 P.S. Please don't sue us. P.S. Please don’t sue us.

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: bgman http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25598 bgman Wed, 07 May 2008 19:26:02 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25598 Nothing like good PR and letting your fans know you appreciate them! Nothing like good PR and letting your fans know you appreciate them!

(report as inappropriate)

]]> By: pats307 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25596 pats307 Wed, 07 May 2008 19:25:35 +0000 http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/07/are-the-bengals-bullies-or-good-businessmen/#comment-25596 no street cred till you have at least one cease and desist letter no street cred till you have at least one cease and desist letter

(report as inappropriate)

]]>