Family of barefoot marathoner sues company over use of name -- Who didn't see this coming?

AbebeBikila.jpg

Family of barefoot marathoner sues company over use of name

Who didn't see this coming? Seems it's not just the use of his name they are upset about, but the fact that they used his name incorrectly...after all...Bikila didn't run in shoes. Oh, and maybe my computer is biased (not me), but when I search for "Bikila" in Google, I get three Vibram FiveFinger links just after their advertisement. The true Bikila doesn't show up until 5th. -TJ


"He won the Rome marathon with bare feet, and nobody did it before then or since then," Bikila, 45, said in a phone interview Tuesday. "It's important that his legacy be respected."

...

The family is seeking at least $15 million in damages, said their attorney, Alex Trauman.

...

To continue reading, please visit any of these links:

U.S. News & World Report
Bikila, who died in 1973, was the only person to win gold in the marathon while running barefoot. Vibram named a model of its Five Fingers shoes ...
 
Oh dear, I hope Ted asked Manuel for permission to use his name ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Longboard
I suspect that Vibram will still come out ahead after settling with the family, just as they did with the last Fivefingers lawsuit. That still does not make it right.
I thought they would have asked permission to use his name first, even offered the family some portion of the sales to do so. Then, if they wanted to, they could have declined the offered and told Vibram to not use his name or else. Seems to me like Vibram never contacted them.
 
...after all...Bikila didn't run in shoes.
Even though he is known for his barefoot running, and trained barefoot, I believe the only "Major" race (Olympic marathon) he performed barefoot was the one at Rome in 1960. He ran most of his major races minimally. So...if Vibram never ask for permission to use his name (and it sounds like they didn't) I see them winning lawsuit/compensation for royalties due, but I don't see this lawsuit for what sounds like defamation of character panning out.
 
Is it against the law or somehow defamatory to use part of someone's name? Or did they use more than just 'Bikila'? I have a pair of Bikila's but I don't recall anything more than that. Did they have some kind of blurb about Abebe Bikila with the product that specifically named him? I can't see what the big deal is, I didn't even know who he was until long after I bought them... not like there is a picture of him on the box or anything. Unlike my last pair of regular running shoes, Bowerman series Nikes that have a picture of Bill Bowerman on the tongue and I thought a blurb about him somewhere.
 
Sorry, I meant to say he didn't run Rome in shoes. My bad.

Nearly all running shoes back then could be considered minimal...in comparison to today's standards.

I don't think the name, in this case, represents just the man, but the event (after the fact). From Wiki: After the race, when Bikila was asked why he had run barefoot, he replied, “I wanted the whole world to know that my country, Ethiopia, has always won with determination and heroism." Perhaps that is what Vibram was going for by using his name.

Regardless, Abebe trained barefoot, as many in his country do. He was a barefoot runner. He was a pioneer. Because he wore shoes on occasion, do we not consider him a barefoot runner?

I actually have no strong views on this subject either way. Just putting it out there.

Some humor... I actually saw this on the Actor's Studio when Robin Williams was being interviewed. It's hysterical. Robin Williams made reference to Bikila's barefoot running in his stand-up special "Weapons of Self Destruction", saying, "Bikila won the Rome Olympics running barefoot. He was then sponsored by Adidas. When he ran the next Olympics; he carried the f'ing shoes."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bare Lee
I think it is clearly an appropriation of Bikila's name. Whether it is an illegal appropriation is something the courts will have to figure out. I don't think the issue is defamation. Instead it is the ability to control the use of one's name, or, in this case, the ability of Abebe Bikila's heirs to do so. The lawyer quoted in this article seems to think the family has a solid case. By the way, he is not associated with the case. He is a trademark lawyer contacted to comment on the story.

http://espn.go.com/sports/endurance...ner-abebe-bikila-sues-company-vibram-use-name

The reason I think it is a clear appropriation of the name is that I truly believe it was Vibram's intent to create an association of their shoes with the famous Olympic runner. I believe a crucial point in such case is whether the court can determine that the association or likeness could create confusion. While some may not recognize him, I believe that many do. I learned about him nearly 20 years ago when I first took an interest in barefoot running. His story, and that of Zola Budd, were inspirational to me and crucial to my decision to give barefoot running a try. If I saw a pair at the store, I would assume there was some sort of endorsement or at least approval by Bikila's estate.
 
I believe a crucial point in such case is whether the court can determine that the association or likeness could create confusion.

It's created a lot of confusion in the running world, both for the shod and barefoot. :banghead: