CJR
-
Posts
3,177 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by CJR
-
-
The post that Wyshynski linked to explicitly said that it might not be Smith Entertainment Group who filed those trademark applications but (as was discussed over in the 2024-25 NHL thread) whoever did it spent a whole lot of money to remain anonymous, which squatters don't usually do.
-
2 hours ago, gosioux76 said:
Smells like opportunists.
That was my gut feeling but squatters rarely put this many layers of anonymity in place. That Washington Redwolves guy, for example, ran it through an LLC but the mailing address was his home address. This is through a newly-created LLC and a large (therefore probably not cheap) law firm, and that LLC is using CT to anonymize their registered agent.
I'm not saying that means it's Smith, just that it's more interesting than I initially thought.
And Utah Fury is apparently the name of a team in one of those hockey romance books, which is the same issue the Seattle Sockeyes name ran into, so that's just kind of funny to come across it again.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, WSU151 said:
If the Memphis Grizzlies wanted to flex whatever IP muscle they might, wouldn't they have already sued the Utah Grizzlies, the Montana Grizzlies, and the Oakland Golden Grizzlies?
IP law is centered around similarity and confusion caused between similar brands.
Apple Federal Credit Union exists because nobody confuses it with Apple Inc. Not sure how many people will confuse Memphis Grizzlies basketball with Utah Grizzlies hockey especially if the colors and logos are completely different.
The NHL is a league that has three teams with wings in their logos and nobody complains.
There's also the fact that a trademark has already been issued (and has been issued for years) to the ECHL Grizzlies for "Utah Grizzlies" for the purposes of "Entertainment services, namely professional hockey games and exhibitions."
In fact, when that "Utah Grizzlies" mark was applied for, the NBA did oppose it, as was their right to do. If I'm reading the history correctly, the NBA opposed and there were settlement negotiations and then the opposition was dropped and the trademark application was approved. Unless there was some settlement that is not noted in the trademark filing itself (I don't even know if that's possible, maybe Utah explicitly said "If you allow this, we promise to never sell to an NHL team" or something like that), the NBA Grizzlies are too late. Their chance to say no was in 2008 and they allowed it.
Whether Smith wants to have a team that shares a name with an NBA team is a whole other discussion. There are certainly branding-related issues with the name that are not trademark-related issues.
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, tBBP said:
I bring all this up because I remember VGK ran into this same issue trying to procure the name "Knights"...except they couldn't because the junior league London Knights already had the nickname. Granted, same sport, but two different leagues, so the precedent is there.
This keeps getting repeated and isn't entirely true.
At one point, Bill Foley said that his team couldn't be the Knights because of London and everyone ran with that. Foley said a lot of things at that time that weren't entirely true. The London Knights explicitly said that no one from Vegas even asked them about using the name and Foley later said it was always going to be the something Knights.We only have to look at the next expansion to see how it can work out. Seattle's ownership filed a trademark application for Palm Springs Firebirds as their AHL team. The OHL Flint Firebirds opposed it. The two sides worked out a deal and Flint dropped their opposition (and then the Firebirds switched to "Coachella Valley" as their place name).
The Memphis Grizzlies (or any other trademark holder) might choose to fight harder than the Flint Firebirds did but it's not the automatic rejection that it's sometimes made out to be.
-
1
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:
Yzerfan (admin)
Different name but I'm still here and still an admin. I just don't do anything.
-
2
-
-
Seattle Mad Oxen?
-
Strickland says the Coyotes are staying put no matter the result of the vote tomorrow.
https://twitter.com/andystrickland/status/351686847086342144
Not sure I believe it. If the league lets its bluff get called, they'll never get to bully a municipality into an arena deal again.
-
When asked to clarify her statement, Alvarez replied, “I called them knuckleheads, because they don’t get it. They don’t get it. They don’t get it. They’re going to continue discussions. Discussions of what? We’re selling City Hall because of paying $50 million. C’mon. C’mon.”
http://www.azcentral...yotes-deal.html
And then there's the fact that the deal completely fell apart and got put back together in a matter of hours.
-
-
Seattle's mayor says Kypreos is wrong, Key Arena will be ready.
http://www.twitter.com/mayormcginn/status/348111881749266433
"Will" be ready?
-
So Kypreos says that Glendale will not be giving RSE the money they want... But also that Key Arena won't be ready this season so the team is staying put anyway.
http://kuklaskorner.com/hockey/comments/early-morning-tweets-bode-poorly-for-the-coyotes
I'd thought that second part had already been debunked but even if it's true, I find it hard to believe that the NHL would say "Okay, fine, you called our bluff, we'll stick around." They'll find an even worse place to put the team for next year.
-
Via @NHLhistorygirl...
On this date in 2001, Glendale City Council voted to approve a new arena for the #Coyotes. -
I'm just going to directly quote @seangentille here...
For god's sake: Sunnucks reporting Greg Jamison is still looking for financing. http://bit.ly/THdC11 -
?I don?t have as much confidence as I did,? Scruggs said, adding that she had called Jamison last month to inquire about the status of his bid and didn?t get a call back.
Is that because she should have called this Jamieson guy?
http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/westsideinsider/152205
-
He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Gary Bettman.
Do it to Atlanta! Do it to Atlanta! Not me! Atlanta!
-
Why do the Buffalo Sabres have 1975 and 1980 Prince of Wales Champions banners?
The playoffs were not conference by conference in those seasons.
They were matched up based on points 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15 etc.
In 1980, they didn't make the Stanley Cup Finals, which makes
that banner misleading.
Technically they had the most points in the conference those two years.
So if anything shouldn't they both say
"Wales Conference Regular Season Champions" (which I feel shouldn't have a banner)
like the Red Wings have?
The Prince of Wales Trophy was for the regular season champions of the Wales Conference from 1974-75 to 1980-81.
-
This is still kind of in beta but I figured I'd post it here...
http://www.detroithockey.net/team/arena/rafters.php
A diagram of the placement of the Red Wings' banners at Joe Louis Arena. Something I've been playing around with for awhile.
-
Because, like starting new threads, you have to have a couple posts under your belt to do it.
-
The Red Wings changed their banners too.
When they won the cup in 1997 they changed all their past banners to look like the new ones. Also, when they retired Yzerman's # they changed the old retired number banners to look like Yzerman's
- Dan
Not that the Cup banners were right to begin with. They all had the current version of the logo on them rather than the version used in that year. Small difference but still...
The retired number banners are always going to be wrong if you want to have a name on them but still have them look like the back of a sweater, since most of the players didn't have a name on their backs.
I'm not against redesigning banners to be consistant, as long as you don't try to rewrite history too. You can have the same design and use different logos.
-
Joe Louis Arena...
http://www.detroithockey.net/multimedia/se...keyword=banners
If it were up to me, the Cup banners and the retired number banners would be on opposite ends of the ice and all of the other banners would be smaller. Maybe when someone gives me billions of dollars to buy the team.
-
CuJo in Detroit
I see you and raise with CuJo in Grand Rapids
And for a little more, Chris Osgood in GR
-
I was specifically thinking of page headings and navigation. Most of the time they come first in the page's source code and your content comes somewhere later. Maybe you don't want to make the search engines look so hard for your content (not that they have to look hard on a CSS-based page, anyway), you can list your content first and relatively position it to where you want, then add the other elements at the end of the X/HTML and absolutely position them back to where you want them to appear on the page.
Maybe that's a bad example, I don't know, I'll readily admit that I don't know nearly as much CSS as I'd like.
-
Although you can do positioning in your CSS, I suggest that you don't use absolute positioning. The problem I often see is that the content of a previous div tag can overlap the content of the next div tag because of this.
Just wanted to briefly touch on this.
Absolute positioning can cause problems, that's for sure, but it's also a very powerful tool to know how to use. If you're worried about source order, you almost have to use absolute positioning.
2024-25 NHL Changes
in Sports Logo News
Posted
The Utah Black Diamonds are a Major League Pickleball team.