KSSioux

What is the logo for the Fighting Illini? That is why I referenced them as being direct comparison to NoDak's. I am sure someone would try to come up with some sort of representation. That should be voted on as well. This was just my opinion on what would be my preference if not just remaining North Dakota.

Why NoDak's would work. This is my second choice behind remaining North Dakota, because I cannot stomach the idea of condoms being thrown on the ice or courts of our hockey, basketball, volleyball etc. teams. I think the closest analogy to NoDak's is the Illinois Fighting Illini. The NCAA originally had them on the naughty list, but they said they could not get a tribal support because there was no such thing as the Illini tribe. Illini was a generic term for Illinois people, hence NoDak's would be for all North Dakota people. Granted Illinois did have Chief Iliniwek (spelling?), but the NCAA was OK with their reasoning as long as they did away with using him as well as any Native American imagery that they had used in the past. I think there are good marketing and copyright phrases that could be done by the marketing group and the symbol of what a NoDak would look like is the only concern that I have based on what the marketing company would come up with. Things to go along with NoDak Nation and old terms such as Roll Tribe could be used since a tribe is a group of people. Just my opinion on why it is my second choice ahead of the others.

You are correct, other than the word "limited". That would be very troublesome to any patent attorney fighting for folks that are against the university. I have numerous patents and have helped in getting trademarked names. I would ask that you read up on the trademark definitions, and it does go beyond a "limited" edition of a few items. That would be very hard to defend if they had to, and my argument was that according to the agreement that is more worrisome than the wording of "replacement" for the name. Do you think it was through the NCAA's kind heart that they allowed the logos in the Ralph to stay? They knew of this wording and it gives a way for the university to help protect these trademarks through historical and very open display, which is one point of a trademarked item. It had nothing to do with their kindness. My point is that this section was always going to be a conundrum both the school and the NCAA were going to have to walk a fine line with.

You must create commerce with the logo and nickname within three years. Try finding this "collection", and prove that UND is making money off of the Fighting Sioux name and the Ben Brien logo. Someone can easily create something with the logo and a derogatory saying regarding the NCAA on it and the university would have to go after them according to the NCAA. It is baffling to me how their is a lack of understanding regarding this section and how crazy it is that it was included in this way. I agree it will be very difficult to manage, but that is why I bring it up, and does not mean that I am wrong.

Please read the section on Intellectual Property (I believe section 2 - subsection J) before you keep spouting off on people keeping on chanting the Fighting Sioux. Anyone who has any background in IP knows the school is in more trouble with the NCAA agreement and how it will keep the trademark of Fighting Sioux and the Ben Brien logo, than if we remain just North Dakota. According to the agreement the school must maintain the rights to these or give them up to one of the local tribes. So regardless of what nickname, or having no nickname (by the way you can replace something with nothing - ask anyone who has been part of downsizing, or just anyone who knows basic math), those people who continue to shout Sioux, or wear the logo are actually helping to keep the agreement with the NCAA according to the IP section. I am definitely on record as wanting whatever name to go up against remaining North Dakota and needing to have it create a majority to win. I know that is now how it must be according to the committee, but that does not mean it is not the right thing to do.

"To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society" Theodore Roosevelt

Yes, we both agree with that. Unfortunately there are folks who want to "stick it to the man", whether it be the NCAA or for those misinformed the Sioux people. That is why any nickname should need a majority of votes that would surpass remaining North Dakota. If that is the case than it would have to be lived with by those alumni, faculty, and students of the University.

FYI, my wife is disgusted that Cavalry made the list, but she did state that if UND's nickname had been Cavalry all along, she would not have had a problem with it. The big issue is in the perception of how/why now that nickname would be chosen and the perception that follows.

Well I guess we cannot let facts get in the way. Please look at the number of recommendations to the committee that had North Dakota, or some form thereof as the lead option (other than remaining Fighting Sioux). There is fact #1 regarding a majority view. Also, look at the Forum poll which has remaining North Dakota as the majority opinion. Facts are on my side. As far as the NCAA goes, there is legal jargon involved, but officially making it North Dakota would satisfy the requirement. I stated that we could trademark a slogan such as "Force of the North" to be used. It does not have to be a nickname. I stated it already had been used on a couple of occasions already by the University.

I would disagree with this comment. If remaining North Dakota is not on the list, this whole thing is a farce as it is a majority opinion that it be included from the polls and the suggestions to the committee. I know one person, hand selected by Kelley, will likely lobby for North Dakota not being on the list. I stated before, any nickname should be good enough to beat remaining North Dakota by a vote. If it does not, we remain North Dakota, which is the official change of nickname required by the NCAA. I would not oppose them trademarking a phrase such as, "Force of the North", but not as an official nickname. It obviously was used already on a few sports posters in the 2005-2007 years, and would be OK with me. Bottom line, to suggest "what is best for UND" is just an opinion. It is likely due to the "opinion" that a nickname and new logo will bring in more money for UND, which is Kelley's progressive view and is just that, an opinion. Whose to say that the marketing group could not come up with a North Dakota trademarked script or logo, or the trademarked phrase like "Force of the North" that would do better than anything else. My wife is part native American and loved the nickname "Fighting Sioux", but was disgusted that Cavalry made the list. She saw nothing beneficial and thought folks would vote for it as a slap in the face of the NCAA and also native americans (which a majority was in favor of the nickname).

Actually your "zero chance" is not correct. I have limited my donations to a specific area based on the administrations handling of this issue, as many friends of mine have done as well. The majority of people want it to remain North Dakota, and unless a true majority votes for a nickname/logo that would beat out remaining North Dakota head to head, I would continue to adjust my donations accordingly. In discussions with friends of mine they feel the same way. It was easy to contact the previous admins regarding any issue, but this administration is horrible. Also, staying North Dakota does not give a middle finger to the NCAA as there have been some scare tactic folks on this forum that have brought that up. The NCAA only cared that the Fighting Sioux name not be used anymore. As far as the dollars from a new logo/nickname, that is still up in the air and any predictions regarding that are just opinions. UND must make money off of the Fighting Sioux logos (geometric, Brien, etc.) to maintain copyrights for those. The Dakotah Legacy area is that opportunity, and that will also be a money maker that folks have not considered.

He was placed on the committee (hand picked by President Kelley), as a native American who was against the "Fighting Sioux" sobriquet. You can form your own opinions why he did that, and not include a native American who was for the "Fighting Sioux" as well, but it is what it is. Everyone knew that the "Fighting Sioux" was gone, but I think he wanted to make a statement.

I give them credit for putting the list out there, but you do not know what I had done after I found out about this as far as contacting numerous people at the university. I am not saying that I caused the list to come out, I would have hoped that they did this on their own. However, I doubt I was the only one to make contact about this issue. The last part of the argument about remaining "North Dakota", and putting the other choices up to compete against it is still up in the air. I sincerely hope it happens.

I would like to state how non-transparent this process is likely to be. I have numerous patents and have worked on some trademarking of product names, but never as a government entity. I assumed that we could, if necessary, get a FOIA request to see the population of votes for the nicknames (or remaining the University of North Dakota). That will not be the case since they are using an outside agency to gather the nickname suggestions. I would hope that folks would push to make this happen, and push the committee to make this known. This is very disturbing, but I figured there would be a way to keep the public from knowing once they put some nicknames up to vote. If they are afraid to put remaining the University of North Dakota up against a couple of options like the Screamin' Muskrats or Mighty Spudders, then we should know why this would happen. I am getting tired of the majority not getting a say it what is going to happen. I feel any nickname should be powerful enough to gather more votes than remaining the University of North Dakota. If there is one, than so be it and it will be implemented. My point is why should we "settle". If no nickname is good enough to surpass remaining without one, than we should not have one. I would just hope that the university would be open about what is going on and I would hope the committee will be able to get the information from the marketing agency ad pass that on prior to any choice of votes happening.

I have been aware of this and found it interesting, but have not seen the goods. It would fit in with maintaining the logos if it is done right, but I will argue how much have you seen from this Dacotah collection since the 2013 launch.

I do notice other universities logos when I travel, so I disagree somewhat with your assertion about not noticing other universities. I have been in the LA area a few times and did see a couple of UC-Irvine shirts and sweaters (even some Gaucho stuff). I am sure they are proud of their logo and I was not mentioning this to demean their logo at all. I just wanted to point out that having a logo does not mean $, it must mean something to those who want to wear it.

You are correct in your statement, and I actually laughed when I saw it in the language about maintaining rights years ago as I was not sure how that could be done. As I stated previously, this could be done by some historical use in a game or two every couple of years by some athletic team and they would have to sell off those jersey's/sweaters for money to make this happen. As powerful and corrupt as the NCAA is, I do not think they are above the trademark laws, but nothing will surprise me anymore.

Your "premise" of a North Dakota logo not being marketable is without any background. Even your suggestions of Anteaters (Cal-Irvine), and others actually makes a point in that how many of those do you see. I travel all over the country and outside the country and I have seen "Fighting Sioux" logos everywhere, but never one of the others you mentioned. A "North Dakota" logo could be marketable, and none of us know how marketable that vs. some other nickname or logo could compare. The university can not promote any of the "Fighting Sioux" logos other than those kept for historical purposes and so 0$ can be made from that unless they get permission from the NCAA for a historical use at some point maybe for a game. I doubt that will happen, but is a possibility that I will give you for them making money. I am correct that the most "popular" nickname suggestions were to be brought forward for a vote (of course you are correct that they have to meet NCAA requirements, and the committees requirements, but that is part of my argument that no nickname will fit under that because someone will make something offensive out of anything that is came up with), and I will hope popular means the suggestion that came up the most.

I believe you are stating what most people feel is reasonable at this time and you will have folks call you names for feeling that way. I will add a couple of things to watch for in the near future. President Kelley will find some way to keep the "North Dakota" choice off of the ballot. I know that it is the highest balloted "name" and I will get a FOIA request immediately if it is not on the ballot. I am sure I am not the only one that will push that request and battle to not have a ballot until those numbers are made public. It was stated that the ones with the highest votes will be put forward and I do not believe that will be the case. The "North Dakota" choice meets all of the requirements that the original committee said were necessary. No nickname or logo other than "North Dakota" will not have someone from NDSU or Minnesota come up with something offensive regarding that nickname or logo. Impossible. That will immediately contradict what the original nickname committee stated to the Herald that it was looking for in a nickname. Again, I state that that is impossible as anything can be found to be offensive in some way to some one. Then again, I guess I could be wrong since if a "Crusader" cannot be deemed offensive to a particular religious group by the NCAA, the sky could be the limit on what we could get.

Thanks for your dedication and being a fun player to watch. True to the Sioux tradition. Most people remember the great goals, but it is more than that as fans watching the Sioux. I remember watching Oshie against Michigan Tech near the end of the season take a puck to the chest killing a power play when we were ahead 3-1 with under 4 minutes to play. He did not get hurt, but I am sure Mark Mac was just doing what needed to be done just like Oshie did. You see the same from Stecher, Ausmus, etc. on this team which makes it special as the young kids are seeing what needs to be done. Best wishes for a great career ahead. Looking forward to watching you in the future. Hopefully see you in Boston at the Hockey Humanitarian ceremony.

You could have just as easily posted the Minnesota"M" or Miami(OH)"M", which are easily distinguished from one another. On many of their uniforms that is all they have, or maybe a tiny logo that is hardly seen. They seem to do just fine without a nickname or logo on those uniforms, so why do we need one? I will answer myself. We do not. President Kelley stated right when he started that the teams do not play for the logo, but the school. Just like most progressives, I guess he is allowed to change his mind.

I totally agree with you on this. Since I changed to viewing from my IPad to TV via Apple TV it took away the jerkiness of the feed. A very good, fast, Windows based computer running IE or Chrome on the same wireless setup provides a jerky feed. I have no problems with other feeds on my tower, and Neulion is no help on this and is the same no matter who I use. Definitely recommend the Apple TV for those who can get it. I would since FCS is now a shadow of what it was in the past and with Midco does not look to get better. Those outside the MN, SD, ND area need to utilize NCHC TV and the Apple TV platform works the best from everything that I have tried. FYI, I have one of the fastest wireless modems on the market (5GHz with location learning) and great internet speed, which does not help in the jerkiness.

The last that was stated was "it will be likely a few games on FCS". It is becoming more and more clear that getting games on a national stage is not high priority for Midco, and they want to get a few more customers locally. There has been absolutely nothing from UND to state any efforts on their part in any efforts recently. Really sad for those outside the ND, MN, SD footprint that have to rely on the supposed ever improving webcasts. Like last weeks games that ended with about 10-15 seconds left in the broadcast. When Denver actually has more push than UND for TV coverage, that says a lot for those involved. But remember, it is on pay-per-view on NCHC-TV so everyone get in line.

The only issue I had with the game last night was the brightness was a little greater on the mirroring of my IPad to AppleTV, but pretty good otherwise. I will try to work on that. I do feel for the NCHC in getting this going, promising a lot, and not making sure what capabilities the schools have. This is garbage though, and definitely not better than watching on FCS. I would take this for away games, with a few bugs.

It is really sad that Midco would hold up this deal. As was mentioned, they actually did have it on FCS prior to the CBSSN deal. I do not buy the advertiser end, because that still goes out nationally which is not a bad thing. Those outside the ND,SD, MN area have gotten the short end for the last couple of years and the vision for national exposure should have been thought about. Obviously the CBSSN deal has done nothing until January this season, and the NCHC-TV is a good thing for those on the road, but it is still a long way from true HD in your home viewing. It has improved from last year, but it is not a long term solution until they get all the bugs worked out. The action live video is still jittery, and please do not buy the "it is on your end" answer. The improvements have been in the addition of Apple products to be able to run the games, and the PIP option for all the games. The PIP is good for those who had a subscription for UNDInsider this year, but it will be interesting to see how many subscribers will bail next year if the quality does not improve and only do the school subscription. I realize the cost is not too much more, but it still will be interesting.