batman1211 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said: Suppressing? No. Pointing out why an argument is invalid (IMO, obviously)? Yes It is perfectly valid here. This is a sports logo forum. Ark thinks the two logos are nothing alike except for the oil derrick. I like hearing others people's thoughts on sports logos. Again, I'm not saying that you are trying to suppress (or invalidate) someone's opinion on a sports logo board. You did that. I just think that Ark's (or any others) sports logo opinion shouldn't be attempted to be invalidated. I don't know why there is such a need by some for that. Maybe it makes people feel better about themselves. Thank you Ark for expressing your sports logo opinion here. I feel that this is the correct place to do that. I enjoy reading them. I'm sorry that others need to attempt to invalidate that you or anyone else has an opinion....no matter how "obviously" others think that it should be made "invalid". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 A Houston football team in blue and red with an oil derrick and a team name that suggests working in the oil industry, truly the Fake Razor & Diesel of spring football ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFGiants58 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 10 minutes ago, the admiral said: A Houston football team in blue and red with an oil derrick and a team name that suggests working in the oil industry, truly the Fake Razor & Diesel of spring football I was gonna say the Renegade of Spring Football. Guess what popular wrestler/homophobic douchebag WCW made him emulate! MLB: Project 32 (Complete), MLB: The Defunct Saga (Complete) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 48 minutes ago, batman1211 said: Why is it that some people feel the need to suppress others input and thoughts on this forum? I'm not saying that is what was done by Sec19Row53? I'm just asking. Please either cite some examples to support this accusation you're making, or retract it. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
batman1211 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, BBTV said: Please either cite some examples to support this accusation you're making, or retract it. I made no accusation. I said "I'm not saying that is what was done by Sec19Row53? I'm just asking." This was general question The response was "Suppressing? No. Pointing out why an argument is invalid (IMO, obviously)? Yes" The above is the quote that was the acknowledgement of it being done and that it was the intention by Sec19Row53. I think a legal argument of a statement being admissible in court is for a legal forum. I think that a sports logo forum is for sports logo opinions. I don't understand why someone's opinion here has to hold up to legal standards. Ark felt that the two logos are not similar. IMHO, most people who come to a sports logo forum like to read what others think about about sports logos. There are many logo/designs opinions that may violate legal qualifications or just league rules. All I was asking is why is there a need for that. Again I was making no accusations toward Sec19Row53. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sec19Row53 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, batman1211 said: I made no accusation. I said "I'm not saying that is what was done by Sec19Row53? I'm just asking." This was general question The response was "Suppressing? No. Pointing out why an argument is invalid (IMO, obviously)? Yes" The above is the quote that was the acknowledgement of it being done and that it was the intention by Sec19Row53. I think a legal argument of a statement being admissible in court is for a legal forum. I think that a sports logo forum is for sports logo opinions. I don't understand why someone's opinion here has to hold up to legal standards. Ark felt that the two logos are not similar. IMHO, most people who come to a sports logo forum like to read what others think about about sports logos. There are many logo/designs opinions that may violate legal qualifications or just league rules. All I was asking is why is there a need for that. Again I was making no accusations toward Sec19Row53. But you were. I pointed out how I saw that opinion. As discussion which you seem to want. I thought that there were clues in the original post that led it to be less than truthful. If you don't like how I did it, there isn't much I can do about it. It's where I sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManillaToad Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 hours ago, 4_tattoos said: Seems like all of this could have been avoided had the Roughnecks ditched the oil derrick logo altogether and gone with their secondary instead The outdated trend of turning a logo into a slug to give the notion of charging forward is pretty damn funny when it's just some guy's head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
batman1211 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said: But you were. I pointed out how I saw that opinion. As discussion which you seem to want. I thought that there were clues in the original post that led it to be less than truthful. If you don't like how I did it, there isn't much I can do about it. I agree with you. I have PM'ed you. I'll also gladly apologize publicly if any of my comments have seemed to be anything other that what I was saying. With your agreement, I will be glad to have any and/or all of these comments removed. This is exactly what I would rather not have on a sports logo forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogoFan Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 I called this when the Roughnecks first revealed their logo and most folks that I was reaching. To me, this is no surprise after the precident set in their non-stop harassment of the CFL Colts who were forced to change to the Stallions. NFL will lay claim to anything not nailed down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogoFan Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 hours ago, ManillaToad said: The outdated trend of turning a logo into a slug to give the notion of charging forward is pretty damn funny when it's just some guy's head Exactly. Was his head just lobbed off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 13 hours ago, batman1211 said: I made no accusation. I said "I'm not saying that is what was done by Sec19Row53? I'm just asking." This was general question The response was "Suppressing? No. Pointing out why an argument is invalid (IMO, obviously)? Yes" The above is the quote that was the acknowledgement of it being done and that it was the intention by Sec19Row53. I think a legal argument of a statement being admissible in court is for a legal forum. I think that a sports logo forum is for sports logo opinions. I don't understand why someone's opinion here has to hold up to legal standards. Ark felt that the two logos are not similar. IMHO, most people who come to a sports logo forum like to read what others think about about sports logos. There are many logo/designs opinions that may violate legal qualifications or just league rules. All I was asking is why is there a need for that. Again I was making no accusations toward Sec19Row53. 14 hours ago, batman1211 said: Why is it that some people feel the need to suppress others input and thoughts on this forum? I'm not saying that is what was done by Sec19Row53? I'm just asking. You said that "some people feel the need to suppress others[sic] input and thoughts on this forum". So you're accusing some people of suppressing thoughts, even if not Sec19Row53. Just curious where you've seen such suppression since you've apparently noticed it enough to comment on it. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonBull9584 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 So the NFL's argument is that football fans can't tell the difference between the logos of an NFL team that hasn't been around since 1998 and a new XFL team? NFL doesn't respect their fans' intelligence do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkerws Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 The Roughnecks logo is, in my opinion and others, just an updated Oilers logo. That’s where the NFL will probably start their objections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sec19Row53 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 14 hours ago, batman1211 said: I agree with you. I have PM'ed you. I'll also gladly apologize publicly if any of my comments have seemed to be anything other that what I was saying. With your agreement, I will be glad to have any and/or all of these comments removed. This is exactly what I would rather not have on a sports logo forum. It's all good. Paraphrasing my response to you - we can disagree and discuss stuff. Anything anyone posts is alwasy 'in my opinion'. I have no problems with you or this whole discussion. We're good! As for the Roughnecks, the logo is (in my opinion ) clearly derived from, or meant to invoke, the Houston Oilers. As someone said upthread, the NFL opposed it all along, but this delay is just how that process normally works. It's where I sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 21 hours ago, CrimsonBull9584 said: So the NFL's argument is that football fans can't tell the difference between the logos of an NFL team that hasn't been around since 1998 and a new XFL team? NFL doesn't respect their fans' intelligence do they? Not all football fans are logo obsessed like us. I guarantee many would see a Roughnecks shirt with just the logo and think that it was an Oilers shirt. And if you told them it wasn't, they would say "close enough" or "what's the difference?". And THAT is why it is important to protect your brand and it's distinction. https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopard88 Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 Speaking as an actual lawyer, I think the NFL has a very strong case in this instance. The standard is whether there is likelihood of confusion as to the source of the product. The Roughnecks logo checks a lot of boxes in that review. 1. It is a logo for a football team. 2. That team plays in Houston. 3. The logo is, in simplest terms, a recolored version of the original Oilers logo with H overlay and a star on top. 4. The recolored version is similar in the color to the logo used by the Oilers in the 60s and early 70s (the powder blue, silver and red era). Since the NFL still uses the Oilers logo on merchandise and may use it on the field again if the one helmet rule is abolished, the league almost has no choice but to contest the registration of the Roughnecks logo. Otherwise, its right to use the Oilers logo is at risk. Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017 ///// Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008 Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schlim Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 On 1/9/2021 at 5:51 PM, 4_tattoos said: Seems like all of this could have been avoided had the Roughnecks ditched the oil derrick logo altogether and gone with their secondary instead I didn't know Flying Elvis had a day job.Tough times all around! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 4 hours ago, leopard88 said: Speaking as an actual lawyer, I think the NFL has a very strong case in this instance. The standard is whether there is likelihood of confusion as to the source of the product. The Roughnecks logo checks a lot of boxes in that review. 1. It is a logo for a football team. 2. That team plays in Houston. 3. The logo is, in simplest terms, a recolored version of the original Oilers logo with H overlay and a star on top. 4. The recolored version is similar in the color to the logo used by the Oilers in the 60s and early 70s (the powder blue, silver and red era). Since the NFL still uses the Oilers logo on merchandise and may use it on the field again if the one helmet rule is abolished, the league almost has no choice but to contest the registration of the Roughnecks logo. Otherwise, its right to use the Oilers logo is at risk. Which is why I wanna see the cost for the XFL to challenge/keep the logo vs the XFL coming up with something else. As I said before, they don't have a long history, very short in fact. They're currently not playing and, even though they plan on playing next year, that is still an uncertainty. I think they'd be better off just getting rid of it. https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDR Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 The logo is so forced anyway, just ditch it and come up with something better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopard88 Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 It also doesn't help the XFL's cause that the former CEO of the league used to play for the Houston Oilers. That makes it a little harder to argue that it was just a coincidence. Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017 ///// Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008 Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.