Name Reveal 2.2.22

Yes it does, and the three stars and two bars on the D.C. Flag come directly from the George Washington family crest/coat of arms. So Commanders would be a fitting name.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/COA_George_Washington.svg/220px-COA_George_Washington.svg.png

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/George_Washington%E2%80%99s_bookplate._Sotheby%27s .jpg

^^ yup thats the Washington family crest

The Washington Warthogs were a professional indoor soccer team back in the 90s.

You think they could hurdle this trademark issue if they tried ? ^^

You think they could hurdle this trademark issue if they tried ? ^^Nope, no trademark can ever be overcome.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

Washington Warpath......has a nice ring to it.....I sort of links back to the Redskins past somewhat.

Nope, no trademark can ever be overcome.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

:laughing- Hope neither the AAF nor the JFK Commanders F up the plan to getting this great federating non offensive name ^^

Nope, no trademark can ever be overcome.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

Maybe practically true but not legally correct. i.e. some trademarks (depending on the legal locality they are established) are renewable, they can lapse through lack of use etc. No trademark exists in perpetuity without the owners active involvement, but in this case, it's likely that any dispute we were headed for and avoided, is with a name that's in current trademarked use.

Maybe we could have gone back and found a lapsed one? Ye Olde Warthoges? Ye Scarlet Werwulf?

Washington Warpath......has a nice ring to it.....I sort of links back to the Redskins past somewhat.

Honestly that is a sick name

Maybe practically true but not legally correct. i.e. some trademarks (depending on the legal locality they are established) are renewable, they can lapse through lack of use etc. No trademark exists in perpetuity without the owners active involvement, but in this case, it's likely that any dispute we were headed for and avoided, is with a name that's in current trademarked use.

Maybe we could have gone back and found a lapsed one? Ye Olde Warthoges? Ye Scarlet Werwulf?

I'm pretty sure CRed was being sarcastic ;-)

Even with existing trademarks, you have to prove potential consumer confusion. In the end it's all about leverage, and how bad do you want to use the name, how much are you ready to pay to avoid going to court, and how much the other camp really wants to go to court...

Already posted it, but good read about how all this works (about Redwolves but what you learn in there applies to any name IMO):

https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2020/jul/21/wolves-not-just-for-teams-taking/

And this is where I fail to understand the seeming disinterest in the fan favourites. WFT could easily (and maybe will) stick to the W logo or a derivation, and go with Redwolves (one word) for instance. No comparison on logo and little confusion therefore with a name that wasn't even identical. And with Snyders dollars, probably easily winnable if challenged like this case.

I actually suspect they didn't want a contentious name considered on 2 fronts; any legal action would likely draw the process out and be bad publicity (pro sports team picking on a school), and the lesser factor that it would have tipped everyone to the desired name.

But that doesn't mean you have to roll over and go with something tame or unrepresentative. I'll support it whatever it is, but I won't be comfortable with something derivative/lacking in dynamic potential. Commanders is meh, and Admirals would be worse in my mind.

FWIW , I spoke to Greg Curl (Kam's dad) and he is hearing its Commanders as well.. Now he can't officially say that but you know Kam knows lol.

Glad it'll be over in a few weeks.