PDA

View Full Version : A Solution for the "Fighting" Sioux, Denver's Boone, and Other "Lost" Mascots...



Pages : 1 2 [3]

bueller
02-17-2011, 08:26 PM
I thought the original post was advocating for a law to force abandonment of trademarks in these situations.

bigblue_dl
02-17-2011, 08:30 PM
From my understanding, a logo or trademark is not open to the public sphere unless the owner ceases to fight for its protection. While the school may not continue to use the logo or trademark, they still have the right to protect from its unlicensed use by others. They can still send cease and desist letters and even sue for damages from those who made a profit off of it.

This makes sense if you think about it, no company would ever update their logo or slogan if they knew people could make money off their old one, or even worse use that old logo to somehow put their company or product in a bad light.

With most schools' budget problems, why wouldn't they continue to fight for damages?
But the university could sell the rights to the logo and actually make some money off of it. Why wouldn't they do it? It won't make them money just sitting there unused.

darker98
02-17-2011, 08:31 PM
I thought the original post was advocating for a law to force abandonment of trademarks in these situations.

I'm slow so i'm not following where you are going.

bueller
02-17-2011, 09:41 PM
When a school declares that a slogan, mascot, nickname, etc will no longer be used because it isn't PC and must be eliminated for the common good, that entity immediately becomes public domain*. From that day forward the school forfeits all copyrights, trademarks, etc related to it and is not entitled to any royalties from its use and must make public all graphics, fonts, and other materials related to such items. Thus the entity becomes public property and anyone who chooses can use it in any manner that they see fit. Maybe they could use it for their own sports team, personal business slogan, or simply for personal financial gain (printing T-shirts, stickers, banners, etc.) in the realm of sports marketing.
* The one exception being, those that caused the entity to become public domain shall be banned from any use of such items.

I think what he wants is a law that forces schools to give up rights to logos, mascots, etc if they choose to change said logos or mascots for bull**** PC reasons.

darker98
02-17-2011, 10:06 PM
I think what he wants is a law that forces schools to give up rights to logos, mascots, etc if they choose to change said logos or mascots for bull**** PC reasons.

see your point and agree.

LynahFan
02-18-2011, 01:36 AM
But the university could sell the rights to the logo and actually make some money off of it. Why wouldn't they do it? It won't make them money just sitting there unused.
Because whoever buys the rights will compete with the officially licensed merchandise sold by the university. For every Boone shirt or trinket sold, that's one fewer...um...war-chicken logo thing (do they still use that?) that DU will sell. I'm quite shocked that DU went that route.

Rhett
02-18-2011, 02:07 AM
"Seminole" and "Sioux" denote groups legally recognized by United States law. The U.S. even has formal treaties with these groups (but not with "The Fighting Irish.")

O RLY?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland_%E2%80%93_United_States_relations

UML
02-18-2011, 06:26 AM
We lost our Chiefs mascot about 20 years ago due to PC crap. I hope you guys get to keep the Sioux mascot.

JohnsonsJerseys
02-18-2011, 06:58 AM
I think what he wants is a law that forces schools to give up rights to logos, mascots, etc if they choose to change said logos or mascots for bull**** PC reasons.

Yes, that was the point of my original post. If something is so bad the the school has to distance itself from said entity (name, logo, etc), then the public that still wants it should be able to use/profit from it as they see fit. It is the university's loss for being spineless. I just think it would be pretty hypocritical for a university to ban a name/logo but then retain the rights to it. It would be like living in the 1920's, banning alcohol, and then stockpiling it in your basement. If it is so bad, how come you don't get rid of it?

Ryan J

Osorojo
02-18-2011, 02:18 PM
If universities accept public tax funds from government then universities must dance to the politicians' tune - or lose public funding. The issue of selling the rights to or profiting from an abandoned non-PC logo will ultimately be decided by elected officials. Money talks.

FlagDUDE08
02-18-2011, 02:42 PM
If universities accept public tax funds from government then universities must dance to the politicians' tune - or lose public funding. The issue of selling the rights to or profiting from an abandoned non-PC logo will ultimately be decided by elected officials. Money talks.

Then why did Quinnipiac change from the Braves?

MavsFan
02-18-2011, 03:51 PM
I haven't followed this terribly closely, but my understanding is that it is the NCAA forcing this change, not politicians and government funding.

MDNSioux
02-21-2011, 11:52 PM
Well, it looks like some people in North Dakota are not going to let the nickname issue go away without another fight. I doubt this will pass, but would love to see it happen.

From today's GF Herald:

BISMARCK – The North Dakota House will decide next week whether the University of North Dakota nickname debate should continue.

The House Education Committee gave a do-pass recommendation on Wednesday to a bill supporting the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo.

House Bill 1263 states UND athletic teams shall be known as the Fighting Sioux. Neither UND nor the state Board of Higher Education may take action to discontinue the use of the nickname or logo.

It requires the attorney general to consider filing a federal anti-trust claim against the NCAA if the association takes any action to penalize UND for using the nickname and logo.

The bill is sponsored by House Majority Leader Al Carlson of Fargo and received a 10-5 favorable vote. The other two nickname bills received do-not-pass recommendations.

All of the nickname bills still need to go to the House floor for final votes. Carlson said this could happen as early as Monday, but Tuesday is more likely.

If one or more are approved, the state Senate will then take up the issue.

Wednesday’s recommendations come three weeks after the committee listened to several hours’ worth of testimony from nickname supporters and opponents.

During the committee discussion, Rep. Phil Mueller, D-Valley City, said he’s never had a problem with the Fighting Sioux nickname, but he would not support the bill.

He said the state Board of Higher Education and UND concluded it’s time to move on.

“I guess I’m of common mind with them about that. This isn’t going to go away,” Mueller said. “I don’t think that the Standing Rock people are going to decide this is all fine and the NCAA is going to be happy.”

The NCAA has deemed the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo “hostile and abusive.” Opponents say the nickname and logo have contributed to an atmosphere where racist and abusive incidents occurred.

Rep. David Rust, R-Tioga, reviewed numbers of Native American students at the state’s colleges. He said UND has higher numbers than other campuses, and he didn’t think this would be so if the campus was unfriendly and unsafe.

Rep. RaeAnn Kelsch, R-Mandan, said it bothered her that the state Board of Higher Education took a neutral stance on the nickname bills.

If the board is confident in its decision to move on and believes it was fully transparent and explored every angle, representatives should have testified in opposition, she said.

“If you truly believe what you did was right and you truly believe that the decision was the way it should have been, then man up and come in and testify against it. But that didn’t happen,” she said.

Rep. Corey Mock, D-Grand Forks, said he has no problem with turning over every stone to exhaust all of the options. However, he said no other school in the state has its nickname and logo in state law.

“More importantly, there’s no other nickname or logo that has the repercussions that this bill has on its student-athletes,” he said.

UND has decided to move on, and the bill takes away local control, he said. Mock said he couldn’t support the bill due to the impact it would have on students.

Rep. Mike Schatz, R-New England, said the state of North Dakota takes priority over an association.

“What we decide as the state of North Dakota about this issue is what it’s going to be,” he said. “I’m very much in favor of this bill.”

Mock tried to amend one of the other Fighting Sioux bills that discussed permission from the tribes, but he did not get the votes to do so.

Here is the vote breakdown on the bill that passed:

YAY: Kelsch; Rep. Lisa Meier, R-Bismarck; Rep. Joe Heilman, R-Fargo; Rep. Brenda Heller, R-Beulah; Rep. Dennis Johnson, R-Devils Lake; Rep. Karen Karls, R-Bismarck; Rep. Karen Rohr, R-Mandan; Rust; Schatz; Rep. Lyle Hanson, D-Jamestown.

NAY: Rep. Mark Sanford, R-Grand Forks; Rep. John Wall, R-Wahpeton; Rep. Bob Hunskor, D-Newburg; Mock; Mueller.

Passed 65-28 not even close...now it goes to the senate.

MDNSioux
02-21-2011, 11:59 PM
Article from the Bismarck Tribune.

The North Dakota House approved a bill Monday that would keep the Fighting Sioux nickname for the University of North Dakota.
House Bill 1263 would write the Fighting Sioux name into state law. It bars UND or the Board of Higher Education from taking any action to transition to a new name and directs Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem to consider an antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA if it imposes penalties as a result of the bill.
The bill was passed mainly along partisan lines in a 65-28 vote with most Democrats voting against the measure and Republicans voting for it. It now goes to the Senate.
The university has been preparing to drop the nickname and an American Indian head logo this summer as part of a negotiated lawsuit settlement with the NCAA, which considers both to be hostile and abusive to American Indians.
If UND keeps the Fighting Sioux nickname, the school may be barred from hosting NCAA postseason tournaments.
"Some say it's too late. Some say it's over. It's a done deal," Rep. Mike Schatz, R-New England, said on the House floor.
"This is a state identity bill. This isn't just about the University of North Dakota. It's bigger than that," he added later.
Schatz and other supporters of the bill said the logo was used in a manner respectful to Native Americans. They also said the majority of North Dakotans wanted the logo to stay and members of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe never had an opportunity to vote and give their opinion on the matter.
Opponents said it was time to let the issue go and let the campus move on, especially given the constitutional question surrounding the bill.
Stenehjem said he believed the concept of forcing the school to keep the name was unconstitutional when the bill was first introduced. During the debate, House Majority Leader Al Carlson of Fargo, the bill's sponsor, said he was well aware that it may face a legal challenge.
That acknowledgment brought questions from some.
"If there's going to be a legal challenge, why isn't there a fiscal note on the bill?" asked House Minority Leader Jerry Kelsh, D-Fullerton, referring to an estimate of a bill's cost.
"If we're going to be questioning fiscal notes, we should be questioning the cost of changing names," said Rep. RaeAnn Kelsch, R-Mandan, of a $20 million estimate thrown out by Schatz.
With many Democrats speaking against the bill, she later questioned why it had become a partisan issue.
Both UND President Robert Kelley and University System Chancellor Bill Goetz share that concern.
"The Board of Higher Education is identified as the entity that makes these decisions, so yes, there is a constitutional issue," Goetz said.
"If this continues to pass, we could see a constitutional challenge," Kelley said.
Rep. Eliot Glassheim, D-Grand Forks, said the bill was outside the Legislature's purview.
"This bill, it seems to me, is another example of the contagious overreaching that seems to afflict this session," he said. Another legislator questioned how the House members suddenly became experts on fixing the Fighting Sioux situation in only 34 days.
Rep. Lonny Winrich, D-Grand Forks, a retired UND professor, said the school should leave the NCAA if it does not want to abide by the rules, but legislation should not be used to keep the ongoing distraction alive.
He also said it was wrong to assume the Standing Rock Sioux tribe hadn't voiced an opinion. The tribal council has passed resolutions opposing the nickname, though the issue has not gone to a reservation vote.
"To assert those seven or eight tribal resolutions by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Council are not valid because they were not endorsed by a vote on the reservation is comparable to saying that any bill that passes this assembly is not valid unless the people of North Dakota voted on it," Winrich said.
The NCAA declared the American Indian nicknames of more than a dozen colleges, including UND, to be "hostile and abusive" in 2005.
The state sued, and the two sides settled out of court in October 2007, with UND agreeing to retire the nickname if the school could not get the consent of the Spirit Lake and Standing Rock Sioux tribes to continue using it.
Kelley said he'll be watching to see what the Senate does with the bill but called it a speed bump in meeting the Aug. 15 deadline for the transition away from the nickname this year.
"I think the campus and Grand Forks are waiting to move on. They're weary of the issue," Kelley said.
Goetz said he, too, was worried about the impact the bill might have.
"The matter of creating additional divisiveness with the tribes is a concern," Goetz said. "It's very unfortunate the campus has to continue to dwell on this issue."
Two other similar measures that would have required approval by the Sioux tribes were taken up afterward and both failed with large margins.

PCM
02-22-2011, 12:01 PM
Under the terms of UND's court settlement with the NCAA, the university must retain ownership of all intellectual property associated with the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo. UND has the option of transfering ownership to a Sioux tribe, however.

Here is a link to the agreement with the NCAA:

http://www.ag.nd.gov/NCAA/SettlementAgreement.pdf

The section related to this topic is on Page. 8 (J).

dggoddard
02-22-2011, 04:08 PM
Wall Street Journal article on the Sioux logo just appeared two hours ago.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703529004576160530177471932.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

Hosting NCAA Championships cost money. Selling Sioux merchandise makes money. Hmmmm.

The NCAA was able to beat back the privately funded UND alums lawsuit. The State suing on Antitrust grounds may be a more expensive kettle of fish for the NCAA to undertake.

PCM
02-22-2011, 09:28 PM
The NCAA was able to beat back the privately funded UND alums lawsuit. The State suing on Antitrust grounds may be a more expensive kettle of fish for the NCAA to undertake.
That "kettle of fish" was tried last time around. I'm no lawyer, but some who are say that the State of North Dakota cannot sue the NCAA for anti-trust again because the last lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice.

FreshFish
02-24-2011, 04:22 PM
I thought the original post was advocating for a law to force abandonment of trademarks in these situations.

I thought the original post was a sarcastic, satirical rant against political correctness. I wonder if we need a sarcasm alert emoticon?

Some people respond to sarcasm by taking it seriously....I have heard that there is a condition from which some people suffer in which they literally take everything literally!


PS stop bashing people with low IQs....

At one time, the term 'moron' was applied to people with an IQ of 51-70, 'imbecile' was applied to people with IQ of 26 - 50, and 'idiot' was applied to people with IQ of 0 - 25.

So I may be a moron but at least I'm not an imbecile!