Officials at the University of Kentucky announced earlier this week that legal actions are going to be taken against the United Kingdom on the grounds of copyright infringement. A spokesperson from the university said that the lawsuit aims to “eliminate the United Kingdom’s blatant disregard for the copy-written university ‘UK’ logo,” adding that, “We were here first, and the United Kingdom should, I don’t know, pick something else to call themselves.”
Finding themselves cash-strapped from severe budget cuts, and over-confident from last year’s NCAA Championship, UK’s lawyers decided to mount the lawsuit, despite its almost insurmountable odds.
Legal analysts around the world are deeming this the international lawsuit of the century, giving the University of Kentucky the advantage in the case due to one simple argument: the university was founded in 1865, while the official title of ‘United Kingdom’ was not adopted until 1927.
When asked about the suit, UK President Eli Capilouto said that university policy prevents him from commenting about ongoing investigations or legal proceedings. However, he did go on to add that “someone needs to put them red-coats back in their place.”
“While I’m all for taking pride in something you do, I’m tired of hearing about the stupid Olympics. England this, England that, Pippa’s hat…” Capilouto said. Needless to say, it is not hard to discern whose idea the suit was.
The hearings are speculated to take place at the start of the 2013, giving both parties plenty of time to gather their arguments. While it is not yet clear if, when, or even where the hearings will take place, it is clear that this will be the talk of the international community. Viewership ratings are already projected to surpass President Obama’s inauguration in 2008.
While the outcome of this trial might seem insignificant to some, President Capilouto takes the proceedings very personally, stating, “I won’t rest until those yellow-teethed tea-drinkers learn to respect the University of Kentucky.” Now the community must patiently wait to see the outcome of the UK v. UK lawsuit.