THUNDER BAY — The buildings were disposed of years ago, but a judge has ruled the Lakehead District School Board still holds the copyright to the names, mascots, logos and colour schemes of six former high schools.
In a decision released last month, Superior Court Justice Helen M. Pierce said a local entrepreneur infringed the board's copyright by failing to seek permission prior to creating a "high school nostalgia" line of clothing and offering it for sale.
She ordered Anna Mauro to pay damages of about $24,000, representing the value of the sweatshirts and t-shirts she sold with the names, logos, mascots and colours of the former FWCI, PACI, Selkirk CVI, Churchill CVI, Lakeview High School and Hillcrest High School.
The case dates back to late 2022, when the board's lawyer sent a letter to Mauro asserting its copyright, and instructing her to remove and destroy the offending items from her store.
She replied that she hadn't realized there was a copyright issue, and suggested mutual fundraising opportunities involving her product line.
While she declined to stop selling the clothing, noting it was peak season for her pop-up store and that it would close within weeks, she offered to compensate the board with royalties, and agreed not to produce any more merchandise without permission.
The board then indicated it was not interested in discussing a fundraising partnership, and threatened to sue if the goods were not immediately removed from sale.
Mauro continued to sell the clothing for a further 23 days in December 2022.
In an affidavit responding to the board's subsequent claim, she indicated that although she had experience with retailing licensed clothing, she had set out to create a generic, non-licensed line of vintage clothing to sell at a lower price and to engage the market for nostalgia.
"I decided to create my own vintage line of 80s themed high school apparel. I do not deny that I used as inspiration the high schools in Thunder Bay that existed in the 70s and 80s. However, I was careful to only select schools that no longer existed and use them as inspiration only," she stated.
She said that her designs did not includes the words "Thunder Bay" or "high school," and that the mascots on the designs were based on stock photos.
Mauro also contended the board could not assert a copyright claim to names such as Hillcrest, Lakeview or Churchill, as there are many other schools with the same name, and argued that – if copyright applies – her artwork was not a breach because her products were different from the original logos.
But Judge Pierce concluded the designs "were created to evoke local nostalgia for the now-closed Thunder Bay high schools."
She said the combined use of historic school colours, mascots, logos associated with the schools, and names of abbreviations, was designed to identify those specific schools and evoke nostalgia in the community.
"In a small city such as Thunder Bay, the touchstones for these schools would immediately be understood," she explained in her written Reasons on Summary Judgment Motion.
The court found the school board's authority under the Education Act to perform all duties conferred by the act extends to corporate control and proprietary interest in artwork developed to identify schools – past and present – under its administration, and that copyright applies as the board has a moral and statutory right extending to names, mascots and logos for all its current and former properties.
Judge Pierce said that by not seeking prior permission from the board, Mauro infringed on its copyright and its "moral rights with respect to the integrity of its work identifying high schools that it had administered."
She granted a permanent injunction prohibiting the use of the names, mascots and logos for any of the board's current or former schools for commercial purposes, and ordered Mauro to deliver any remaining works in her possession to the board.
The court also approved the board's claim for the profits made on the sale of the clothing in the amount of $23,891, saying the defendant had failed to provide the data that would enable the court to deduct her costs such as labour, taxes and rent.
However, the board's request for punitive damages on the basis Mauro kept selling the clothing for about three weeks after she was first put on notice by the board was dismissed.
The judge noted she had immediately responded to the first letter from the lawyer, that some negotiating ensued, and that the revenue from her small operation was modest.
