Abercrombie’s “22” lawsuit frivolous

We are getting worried. Today is our 16th edition of the semester, meaning that, in just a… We are getting worried. Today is our 16th edition of the semester, meaning that, in just a few days, we will be producing our 22nd edition. Normally, we would approach our 22nd day-iversary without trepidation. We, as a paper, are friendly to the number 22 – partial to it, even, seeing that many on the staff will turn 22 this year.

But clothing retailer Abercrombie ‘ Fitch has thrown a monkey wrench in our number-22 lovin’. The chain is suing American Eagle Outfitters, another clothing retailer, over American Eagle’s use of the number 22.

Apparently, Abercrombie claims that people associate 22 with Hollister Co., an Abercrombie-owned company that started in 2000 and caters to a younger crowd than its parent chain. Twenty-two refers to 1922, when Hollister was fictitiously founded, according to the Aug. 26 edition of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

For those who associate the number with, say, Dallas Cowboy Emmitt Smith, Pitt football player Reggie Carter or the product of two and 11, the fact that such a number could be one company’s property comes as a shock. Abercrombie has not registered the number, nor is it the grand Pooh-Bah of numbers. In fact, if we were to list number Pooh-Bahs, Abercrombie would be lucky to be in the top 22, er, 20.

It claims that, because Hollister T-shirts had 22 printed on them before American Eagle started printing shirts with a variety of numbers, the latter company is infringing on the rights of the former.

So they started the legal version of a stripper-fight – a lawsuit.

Keep in mind that Abercrombie did not invent the number 22. It is not responsible for the creation of the numeral ‘2’ or any of its permutations.

That credit belongs to whomever invented the Arabic numeral system. It’s possible that, if he knew it would prompt such frivolous lawsuits, he might scrap the whole thing and open a taco stand – only to be sued for using the letter ‘a’, clearly also Abercrombie’s property.

People have become accustomed to frivolous lawsuits. “E pluribus unum” narrowly beat out “when in doubt, sue,” for what would be stamped on our currency. But this takes ridiculosity to a new level. Abercrombie has no legal right to the number, and should sit down and shut up.

Since claiming numbers is now a national trend – we are in the city that Heinz 57 helped embiggen – The Pitt News would like to officially plant its flag in 1906. Any numbers containing those esteemed digits are hereby property of The Pitt News, at least until our lawyer reminds us that newspapers, like T-shirts, are not legally binding documents.