The University of Alabama, where I taught for 25 years, has sued artist Daniel Moore saying that Moore’s paintings, many of which depicted memorable moments in Crimson Tide football history, violate the University’s trademark protections. Moore has responded with a suit against the University saying it is interferring with his business. Moore also makes a First Amendment claim. He says that what he does — observing a game, executing a painting, making prints and selling them — is no different from what a photojournalist for a newspaper does. The University, he says, does not charge the newspaper with trademark violations when it publishes pictures of the football game and sells its newspapers to the public. So why should it charge him? Why, indeed?