Browns concept

[vicfurth]

Browns, c/p

Here's the link to my drawn version.

Browns on the field

These are some mock-ups that Runnin' Reb made for me. Now the questions...

1) Do you like?

2) Does it look good on the field?

3) Is is good enough to send to someone?

4) Where would I send it?

[NJTank]

I am a traditionalist and taht paints my view on this one and that is its not the Cleveland Browns. Had it been for anothe rteam it will be fine but that is not the Browns.

[Avenger]

Unfortunately, NFL franchises are not allowed to accept unsolicited design submissions.

[puckcool22]

this is good, but im not lovin that white jersey

[BombSkwad]

I understand the purpose for this board...  Believe me I do.  But everyone who is not a Browns fan cannot and probably never will understand the fact that Browns fans DON'T WANT a change.  We LOVE the orange helmets.  We can't imagine a logo on the helmet.  I can deal with tweaks to the uniform, and I wouldn't even be adverse to a metal-flake helmet.  But NO LOGOS!

Just my .02

[Sec19Row53]

Browns, c/p

Here's the link to my drawn version.

Browns on the field

These are some mock-ups that Runnin' Reb made for me. Now the questions...

1) Do you like?

2) Does it look good on the field?

3) Is is good enough to send to someone?

4) Where would I send it?

1) Do you like? No. I'm not a Browns fan, but I just don't think you touch that helmet. I'm also not a fan of sleeves that are colored different from the body of the jersey.

2) Does it look good on the field? Couldn't tell - the mock-ups weren't showing in the thread.

3) Is is good enough to send to someone? No.

4) Where would I send it? You can't, due to the problems with the Baltimore Ravens first logo.

EDIT:  I did some seraching, and here's the legalese involved in the decision.  Note that the Ravens were later found guilty, but not requiredto pay anything due to the plaintiff not being able to prove that anyone bought anything specifically due to the logo.  This was as of 11/03 - not sure if that has changed.

Fourth Circuit Adopts "Strikingly Similar" Doctrine Permitting Inference of Access by an Alleged Infringer

The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has now held that a plaintiff need not prove that an alleged infringer actually accessed a work in question, but only that the infringer (or his intermediary) had the mere opportunity to see the work and that the subsequent material produced is "strikingly similar" to the work in question. Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens Inc., et al., Case No. 99-1617, October 3, 2000 (4th Cir.).

When news of an NFL team for Baltimore, Maryland spread in 1995, Bouchat, an amateur artist, created a helmet design and affixed his creation to a miniature football helmet. Bouchat gave the design and helmet to Eugene Conti, a state official. Conti later arranged a meeting between Bouchat and John Moag, chairman of the Maryland Stadium Authority (MSA) at Moag’s law office on March 28, 1996. The Ravens and David Modell (the team’s owner) were temporarily sharing Moag’s office suite at the time. On April 1 or 2, 1996, Bouchat faxed his drawings to the MSA, one of which was a shield drawing.

Beginning on April 2, 1996, Modell commenced communications with the NFL design team concerning the logo project. When the Ravens unveiled their new logo in June of 1996, it was a Raven holding a shield. Bouchat filed a lawsuit against the Ravens alleging copyright infringement. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Bouchat.

Defendants filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law, based on Bouchat’s failure to prove access to the work. The motion was denied.

The Fourth Circuit affirmed, finding that Bouchat’s proof of a reasonable possibility of access was legally sufficient. Nevertheless, the court went on to adopt the "strikingly similar" doctrine. Gaste v. Kaiserman, 863 F.2d 1061 (2d Cir. 1988). The strikingly similar doctrine permits inference of access in cases where the two works in question are so similar as to create a high probability of copying and negate the reasonable possibility of independent creation. At least four regional circuit courts (the 2nd, 4th, 5th and 7th) have now adopted the "strikingly similar" doctrine.

[MrTitan]

I'm gonna have to agree with Tank on this one Tradition almost always wins especially in the Browns case.

People have been trying to change them for years, it's just not going to work and Browns fans wont let it.

[hrivnak]

When the Ravens unveiled their new logo in June of 1996, it was a Raven holding a shield.

Is that what that logo was supposed to be? I thought it was just a shield with wings. Were we supposed to infer that a Raven was behind there?

[Stampman]

For all that's said about the uni & logo-I really like the endzone.

[lucky34]

Tradition is just that.  You did nice work, but you can't change the Browns.

I personally like the striping change that they made with the home uniform pants this year with the small white striping.  and I would love a metal flake helmet to add depth to the helmet.  But you can't change the Browns unis this drastically.

I wish the 49ers would go back to the old scarlet and gold of the 70s 80s and early 90s. Never really liked the new look.

[See Red]

The new look is the best look the 49ers have had yet.  It was the best modernization of a traditional look that we've seen yet.

As far as the Browns are concerned... Tradition is one thing when you're tradition is a WINNING tradition.  In a world in which 'pre-super bowl' championships don't seem to count... the Browns tradition has been anything but losing -- as they haven't even touched the field of a super bowl.  I'm not saying overhaul the look... just don't act like tradition is such a sacred thing when it hasn't, for the most past, been a winning tradition.

[winters in buffalo]

It's a good design, but I have to agree... the Browns are nearly untouchable.

[the_cynic]

Have the Browns ever used the "Dog" on their helmet as an alternative uniform?

[hrivnak]

Vic,

Don't know if I mentioned it yet, but I really dig this design. I'm not so much a fan of the dog logo, but the colors work really well and I like the jersey design.

[eskishmorskish]

vic, I like your Browns stuff, even though I don't like the dog logo. Those jerseys are really good.

How about a compromise, Browns fans? Leave the helmet orange, add that light-brown color, and use vic's jerseys and pants. You'll have to change eventually (unless you like those ugly truncated stripes on today's jerseys), and if you keep the helmet you have now, the rest of vic's work is pretty much nothing more than an update (and an upgrade, if you ask me).

Best,

e_m

[lucky34]

I think an addition of Tan/khaki would be awesome..if they could do it tastefully and not make it forced.

I also think with this concept..if you keep the orange helmet..you have to add some orange into the jerseys somewhere...maybe a think orange outline on the numbers ??

dunno..

[STL FANATIC]

Vic, I think you need to make the helmet and the pants the same color.

Also, as mentioned, I wouldn't like to see this change made for the NFL team.

[the_cynic]

Why won't the Browns go ahead and use the "Dog" as their primary logo?

[STL FANATIC]

Why won't the Browns go ahead and use the "Dog" as their primary logo?

On the helmet, or just for marketing? I think the helmet is more easily recognized, for one thing. For another, most networks are using the helmet logos now, so for the browns, just orange.

[the_cynic]

Well the least they can do is put this "Dog" logo at the 50 yard line.  I'm sick of seeing that same old boring orange helmet year after year.