Corporate Tattoos Presnt Problem for NBA

Corporate Tattoos Present Problem for NBA

Do they violate league endorsement rules?

New York, March 23, 2001 -- Rasheed Wallace of the Portland Trail Blazers has been asked to advertise for a major candy company with a tattoo on his body. If he decides to accept the sponsorship offer, the issue could be an explosive one for the NBA and free speech supporters.

The main question that needs to be answered is who owns the players' bodies when he is representing the NBA in competition. If the NBA decides to make a statement concerning the potential move of Wallace to display a tattoo of a corporate logo, it would likely point to paragraph 13(b) of the Uniform Players Contract, which states that players will not "sponsor commercial products without the consent of the Team, which shall not be withheld except in the reasonable interests of the Team or NBA." However, officials at the NBA Players Association say, "withholding permission to wear any tattoo would be 'unreasonable'," according toe Salon.com.

Wallace's agent, Bill Strickland, has said his client should be free to use his skin as he sees fit. "There's nothing on the books that says he can't do it," Strickland said. "I find it to be an interesting idea because you've got all kinds of free speech issues if (the league) attempts to stop it."

The NBA has not reached a decision, but it is aware of the potential sponsorship conflicts. Nestle has paid several million dollars for the right to be the league's exclusive candy maker. The candy company that approached Wallace was not Nestle. If Wallace declines the offer, it is only a matter of time before the issue is raised again. Stephen Marbury of the NJ Nets told the Newark Star-Ledger that the decision on whether to tattoo an endorsement on his body "depends on how much money they'd pay. If they're paying the right money, yeah."

Charlene E. M. Wilson