SO: WHAT WILL THEY BE CALLED? *Some other videos you might like:* A's FULL YEAR blocking social comments 📺 ua-cam.com/video/yd-xv-uOQ0k/v-deo.html Former Pac-12 teams facing AWFUL new travel 📺 ua-cam.com/video/ZqIsnTKyFiA/v-deo.html Cincinnati Bengals stadium lease drama emerges 📺 ua-cam.com/video/0of7O57Lmns/v-deo.html Dodger Stadium HUGE Progress [January Clubhouse Update] 📺 ua-cam.com/video/lluSV2VkpVY/v-deo.html Is the 49ers WINDOW closed? 📺 ua-cam.com/video/322rAJ6_j1c/v-deo.html Sports UA-camrs vs. Copyright Claims 📺 ua-cam.com/video/drpDJhe2elc/v-deo.html Sacramento A's patch raises QUESTIONS 📺 ua-cam.com/video/CjpFMVyYoLI/v-deo.html My son guesses every NHL logo 📺 ua-cam.com/video/ObmnXoGkXBo/v-deo.html My new job: Covering the San Jose Sharks 📺 ua-cam.com/video/fzKbqZGN3TU/v-deo.html Decoding the A's visit to Sacramento 📺 ua-cam.com/video/pOj01FBE8yE/v-deo.html
Think about it this way, if the hockey team serves soda or other beverages in cheap cups with the YETI name on it, will people start comparing that to YETI coolers, etc.? If the hockey team stinks and is one of the worst teams in the league, would you want your company name to be the same? Most successful businesses don't want to share their name, especially with an organization/product that is just starting up and could be a huge flop. There are so many available names in the American language, let them come up with something different.
Companies are abusing the Trademark process and have been for years. A name should be able to use the same name for a different product/service. For years it had been fine, but suddenly everybody doesn't allow anything even close.
Not sure. They need to reapply as the "Utah Yetis" and "Yetis Hockey" . Much can be argued around Philadelphia Eagles / American Eagle, similar logos at certain points, and how Google and search engines don't often confuse the two but sometimes they crossover and there has not been major harm even though they both make apparel. There are other instances. But the key is including Utah and /or hockey and the s at the end of Yeti to be just distinct enough. The catch is they must use Yetis with a preceding or following word at all times. Yetis could never be a standalone word use.
I only wish the Blackhawks had switched to the single name spelling in 1979, when the UH-60 was introduced into service. The jokes if that had happened, instead of the reality we got where they waited until '86, would have been incredible...
Which would be a great name...if the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints wasn't actively trying to distance itself from the name "Mormon". Oh, well. Stay tuned...🤔
A good example of a brand collaboration was the Seattle Kraken having a sponsorship agreement with Kraken Rum (which was likely an agreement with regard to existing trademark)
This is a perversion of the process! No intelligent judge would believe a Texas based Yeti cooler company would be confused for a Utah Yeti Hockey Club!
It's over blown beurocracy, there is no sane or intelligent people in it, none. Look at your outgoing prez and your new prez and the menza candidates surrounding them in the senate and congress. Overblown beurocracy is never a good thing.
I'd assume it was more of things like merchandise options there with standard things being things like the cups and coolers that I see for a lot of sports teams with team brandings
Imagine staring a business being so successful you become a corporation then another giant corporations just takes your name. Like it or not it’s a fair ruling and is logical The English language is very diverse there has to be one other word to use
There is a "Red Wing Shoe" Company that has a similar logo as the Detroit "Red Wings". Also the SMU Mustangs have the exact same logo (in reverse) as the Ford Mustang. Has been that way since 1964. Why is that?
I dunno about the Red Wings but I would assume that when it comes to SMU they get away with using the mustang logo for the same reason you see all kinds of high schools with the exact logos of professional teams (my school ripped off the Michigan Panthers) and that is because most schools technically fall under "non-profit organizations" which allows them a legal loophole to get away with that kind of thing.
I looked into the Red Wing Shoe Company point the other day. Here's the thing. Both the Red Wing Shoe Company and the Detroit Red Wings are basically 100+ year old companies. They were both founded at a time when trademarking wasn't as prevalent as it is today. For more context: The Red Wing Shoe Company was founded in 1905. The Detroit Red Wings in 1926. Just like in the case of the YETI brand, the shoe company existed before the hockey team. However, the federal guidelines for trademarking had only just been standardized in 1905. But trademarking wasn't really a huge thing until The Trademark Act went into effect in 1946, 20 and 40 years after both brands had been established. I imagine they were both grandfathered in as they were well established brands at that point. And what are they going to do, tell one of the two companies that have already been around for decades that one of them has to change their name? This is a different scenario here where there is already an existing trademark in place with another trying to get approved for one. As for the Mustang part of the debate, the two have zero in common other than the name. Ford trademarked a car model. Yeah, it's a huge brand nowadays that sells a lot more than just a car, But when it first came out it wasn't like that. They did sell similar products. In the case of the YETI, there will be some crossover with products. Heck, you can already buy YETI tumblers with any NHL team logo on it.
I actually like the name Mammoths! I think it’s a dope name, and I like the potential colors/ uniforms combination. However, what I really like is the potential mascot the team could have. Imagine a giant Mammoth, or a set of giant tusks hanging right below the scoreboard (or built into the scoreboard). Picture it, every time they score ice being shot out of tusks onto the fans. A lot of fans (especially kids), would want to go to the games just to see that alone.
@ I actually think the Black Diamonds would be really cool. A little weird with the hockey/skiing thing, but I think people would get over that quickly and just have a really bad ass theme.
@@MrJoeycrackers Problems might arise if the Yeti company and the team eventually part ways over oh, I don't know - Money (unfortunately a common theme in many aspects of a franchise in the NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB for decades....).
There used to be two New York Giants and now we have the New York and San Francisco Giants. Then you have the New York and Winnipeg Jets, New York and Texas Rangers, UCLA and Boston Bruins, St Louis, Arizona, and Louisville Cardinals, Detroit, LSU, and Clemson Tigers, etc. This just makes no sense.
The only think I can think of is teams back in the early 1900's didn't register team names because they didn't sell merch and their nickname was durived from a combination of what the fan base called them and what the press called them in the papers. If you look at the transfer sheet between the RedSox and Yankees for Babe Ruth it says it was between Boston American League Baseball Club and American League Base Ball Club of New York.
@@alanfox691okay, and Utah Yetis is not the same name as Yeti Coolers. It's similarity and possible confusion they're looking at, not if they're the exact same name.
The company that makes the Yeti drinkware and other products, has over 18 trademarks, so I knew it was very likely to be rejected. Just go with Utah Bighorns! A bighorn sheep on a mountainside. That is a killer logo!
No can do, Big Horn Corp is a power tool company while "Bighorn Company" is a consulting firm. I wouldn't want to buy a power drill or try to attend a meeting and accidentally find out I'm in the middle of a hockey game in Utah! 😰
@@michaelleroy9281 oh sorry, didn’t realize only sports leagues would be interested in the name Stanley cup. Surely a large water bottle company wouldn’t be either
The problem with that is because sponsorship would only last for a limited time. What happens after that sponsorship ends then we have the same issue again with copyright all sponsorship would do is kick the issue down the road a few years, but the problem is still there at some point to be delt with.
Hopefully they can come to a coexistence deal with Yeti for the name. The Tasmania Devils expansion Australian football club had to do something similar with Warner Bros. Apparently that became a lot easier after the WB lawyers found out it was an actual animal after Googling it.
Venom might be trade marked from Marvel/Sony for the Venom character would be my guess but can't say if that is true. My top 2 picks for a name was the Yeti and Mammoth.
If Utah Hockey Club was rejected then several MLS clubs better NOT have their name copyrighted. Those would include Charlotte FC, FC Cincinnati, Nashville SC, New York City FC, Austin FC, FC Dallas, and San Diego FC. Orlando City SC and St. Louis City SC would be questionable. If the patent office is saying that Utah would be the primary element and can’t be copyrighted, then that same standard would apply to at least seven MLS clubs.
The Flames had a similar problem when they tried to name their AHL affiliate the Wranglers when Wrangler (the clothing brand) tried to block them. Big difference is that Calgary already had a hockey club in the past named the Wranglers.
So it's okay to have the name Delta being used for a airline and also for water sink company. We got Domino Sugar and on Pizza come on now. Im going to guess the right hand hasn't been greased enough with enough money to say yes
US Patent office needs to calm the F down. 😂 Although, every time I try to order a Blue Yeti microphone on Amazon, I get “confused” and end up with a Yeti water bottle! 😂😂
Utah owners should have a meeting with Yeti owners and enter a brand licensing agreement. Hence, throw a few million their way for the right to use it.
Atlanta had a similar problem with Thrasher Magazine. Except the magazine sued to stop the use of ‘Atlanta Thrashers’. Venom is the name of power drink.
I’m confused. Professional sports teams in nearby Denver are named the Outlaws and the Mammoth (the later plays in a hockey arena). How are those names not a bigger issue than Yeti?
Two thoughts on this. The first, those are smaller market teams. Most people have never heard of the Colorado Mammoth or Denver Lacrosse teams. So that's not really an issue in my mind. The other is there is already several teams in the big 4 of sports that share mascot names. Heck, California has two in their state! The LA Kings and Sacramento Kings. There's also the New York and Texas Rangers, New York and San Francisco Giants, Carolina and Florida Panthers, just to name a few. And that't not to mention the college sports teams that play each other with the same names. Kentucky and Arizona Wildcats for example. Most of those teams have been established for decades, some more than a century. At the end of the day these aren't final rulings. SEG has 3 months to prove their case. But will the YETI brand give them a fight over it? They are a $3.2 billion company, I imagine they will. Despite their size, I think they know they'd immediately lose out on SEO. It'll be hard to fight the NHL's size and reach there. And with a brand like YETI, their online presence will be a big deal to them. The question at the end of the day is will SEG want to take the path of least resistance or try and push forward in an uphill battle? These application rejections came several months ago in some cases. Yetis was actually a while ago. The 3 months for that appeal is almost over. On Jan 9 they reapplied for both Outlaws and Mammoth but not Yeti so it is looking like Yeti might be out.
Since the team wasn't going to finalize a name for the 2024-25 season anyway, perhaps they should've applied for the trademarks first, see which ones the P&T office green lit, THEN had a naming contest? I do like the Utah Mammoth though. Similar to Yeti, you get a great mascot that kids will probably like (make sure the tusks are short, curved, and pillow soft) and it is an intimidating creature to put on a jersey.
The Houston Astros were originally called the Houston Colt 45s, with the blessing of the firearms company. But, what I understand, things went sour shortly thereafter.
Makes me wish the trademark offices would put the kibosh on the 18 men's soccer teams that have disgraced this country (and Canada) with the Euro brainwashing!
My first guess on "Blizzard" being rejected is related to licensing for the NHL video games, and Activision Blizzard being a competitor to EA in the gaming space. But I do think that would be a bit of a stretch by the registrar's office. "Venom" feels confusing to me because the first trademark that comes to mind is the Spider-Man character. Maybe the overlap is also video game-related, but that sounds like an even bigger stretch.
There are/were 2 indoor football teams called the Green Bay Blizzard and Amarillo Venom. Green Bay is one of the most successful teams in the IFL. Amarillo meanwhile rebranded to the Dusters this off season as they needed to rebrand due to entering a new league and sharing too much branding with an existing team there.
Yeti is the main sponsor for Austin FC the MLS team here in Austin. The Yeti logo is large and across the chest of the Austin FC jersey. Since Yeti is involved in sports and sports apparel I can see why Yeti is trying to protect their brand.
There was a similar thing like this with Fremantle of the Australian Football League. Their nickname is the Dockers, but Levi's sued, so they couldn't use Fremantle Dockers on any of their branding, it had to be Fremantle Football Club, with the "unofficial nickname" of Dockers. About 14 years ago an agreement was reached and now they can use the Dockers name. As for Blizzard, there is the game studio and in the case of Venom, it could be the Marvel trademark.
I get why everyone is laughing at this. but it makes sense. What happens when the Hockey team starts to release merch with 'Yeti' on it? The cooler company also has shirts with 'Yeti' on it. Sure. Not one is going to confuse the team with a cooler. But that's not what the issue is here. If the hockey team agreed to never sell or use any products with the word 'Yeti' on it that the cooler company currently does they might be allowed to use it. Might be a bit difficult to sell a team jersey without your team name on it though. The confusion may also be that people think they're related. When they're not.
I wasn’t aware that the hockey club was going to put a picture of a cooler on their jerseys. This is stupid, it would be free advertising for both entities.
I can see why the name can not be used by the Utah team. They make souvenirs such as beverage cups with the name YETI or YETIS printed on them. People mike think the Utah beverage cups are YETI beverage cups.
Feels like the simple solution is to have yeti be the company make any cups that the the hockey club produces. Unless there is an NHL deal for producing cups which is possible but something I’m unaware of.
Venom does the clothing products for the UFC. Blizzard is a game company. But they could sell cups with team name on it and thats where it has the issue
What's crazy is that in Yeti's Canada website sells NHL licensed drinkware. These are not seen on the Yeti American site, where the big license there is the NFL and Austin FC. Make it happen, NHL. I would like a Utah Yeti Yeti Rambler.
Reminds me of when Baltimore got a CFL club and the NFL took them to court for using the "Stallions", close but not exact match for "Colts" and in a different league. Meanwhile Indianapolis don't have race horses. Yeti should file an amicus brief to clear the path and lean into it with a exclusive mug in the merch shop or branding on the promo cups for beer/whatever. "Get your Yeti at the Yeti (Arena)"
They actually tried using Colts & got sued for that, Stallions is what they pivoted to afterwards in year 2. Baltimore Stallions was actually a better name imo.
Wouldn't that be a great collaboration between the 2 Yetis? They could be the official drinking cup of the Utah Yeti. A Yeti Yeti. As you said, go straight to the source and see if they could hash it out.
People are making fun about the supposed potential confusion, but you have to remember people are actually dumb and do not get the benefit of the doubt. That’s why everything has a warning on it now.
I actually agree with this. As someone in Utah, I went to Dick's Sporting Goods and there was Utah Hockey Club stuff right next to the Yeti display. So I can certainly see the confusion.
This is stupid. They are a hockey team, they aremt making competing water bottles. The term Yeti existed long before Yeti brand. Absolutely ridiculous.
@@alanfox691 Im just saying if they see enough positive value from it then they would likely go through and continue a partnership I cannot speak for either side but I mean why not if its mutually beneficial.
Super cheesy and little league sounding. Yeehaw cowboy tight jeans and cowboy hats just doesn’t seem cool at all. I love the team but will rock Utah hockey club jerseys for the rest of time if they choose Outlaws.
What about Red Wing shoes? Shark vacuums? Denver Broncos vs. Ford Bronco? Washington Commanders vs. Jeep Commander? Sun Microsystems? Texas Rangers vs. New York Rangers? San Francisco Giants vs. New York Giants? Panthers and Panthers (and Panthers)? Jets and Jets? I don’t think people will be misled or confused and think this non-final ruling is ridiculous. But also, as a Coyotes fan, I love it.
SO: WHAT WILL THEY BE CALLED?
*Some other videos you might like:*
A's FULL YEAR blocking social comments
📺 ua-cam.com/video/yd-xv-uOQ0k/v-deo.html
Former Pac-12 teams facing AWFUL new travel
📺 ua-cam.com/video/ZqIsnTKyFiA/v-deo.html
Cincinnati Bengals stadium lease drama emerges
📺 ua-cam.com/video/0of7O57Lmns/v-deo.html
Dodger Stadium HUGE Progress [January Clubhouse Update]
📺 ua-cam.com/video/lluSV2VkpVY/v-deo.html
Is the 49ers WINDOW closed?
📺 ua-cam.com/video/322rAJ6_j1c/v-deo.html
Sports UA-camrs vs. Copyright Claims
📺 ua-cam.com/video/drpDJhe2elc/v-deo.html
Sacramento A's patch raises QUESTIONS
📺 ua-cam.com/video/CjpFMVyYoLI/v-deo.html
My son guesses every NHL logo
📺 ua-cam.com/video/ObmnXoGkXBo/v-deo.html
My new job: Covering the San Jose Sharks
📺 ua-cam.com/video/fzKbqZGN3TU/v-deo.html
Decoding the A's visit to Sacramento
📺 ua-cam.com/video/pOj01FBE8yE/v-deo.html
blizzard entertainment probably has the trademark on "blizzard"
Think about it this way, if the hockey team serves soda or other beverages in cheap cups with the YETI name on it, will people start comparing that to YETI coolers, etc.? If the hockey team stinks and is one of the worst teams in the league, would you want your company name to be the same? Most successful businesses don't want to share their name, especially with an organization/product that is just starting up and could be a huge flop. There are so many available names in the American language, let them come up with something different.
Companies are abusing the Trademark process and have been for years. A name should be able to use the same name for a different product/service. For years it had been fine, but suddenly everybody doesn't allow anything even close.
Team name: Utah Swarm
Stadium name: The Hive🍯
Mascot: Berry the Bee 🐝
Not sure. They need to reapply as the "Utah Yetis" and "Yetis Hockey" . Much can be argued around Philadelphia Eagles / American Eagle, similar logos at certain points, and how Google and search engines don't often confuse the two but sometimes they crossover and there has not been major harm even though they both make apparel. There are other instances.
But the key is including Utah and /or hockey and the s at the end of Yeti to be just distinct enough.
The catch is they must use Yetis with a preceding or following word at all times. Yetis could never be a standalone word use.
I tried to buy tickets to the Blackhawks hockey game and accidentally bought a helicopter
so true!
I only wish the Blackhawks had switched to the single name spelling in 1979, when the UH-60 was introduced into service. The jokes if that had happened, instead of the reality we got where they waited until '86, would have been incredible...
I tried buying Bruins tickets but now I have a big ass brown bear in my backyard
@@brodiebrazil 2 teams named Cardinals, 2 teams called Giants. Also a supermarket chain called Giant.
@@shadowfiremusic 😂 pat that dawg!
Imagine the confusion if the Utah Yeti, win the Stanley Cup
lol!
@@timc7037 …hoisted aloft by team captain Brayden Thermos
WHEN the Utah Yeti win the Stanley Cup
I was so disappointed when my Stanley cup arrived in the mail
This the best thing I've seen in awhile. Thanks for making me laugh.
as I try to drink coffee from a hockey puck, I feel confused and deceived.
haha, well stated
You are underestimating the stupidity of the average American.
Best comment on here😂😂😂
You figure Yeti would want the free advertising. Look at how much companies pay to have their name on a stadium or arena.
I have two maple trees in my front yard. They are meeting with a patent lawyer this afternoon to sue the hockey team in Toronto.
wowwwwwww
Bought Sharks tickets, I ended up with a vacuum cleaner.
My vote is still on Stormin' Mormons
Which would be a great name...if the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints wasn't actively trying to distance itself from the name "Mormon". Oh, well.
Stay tuned...🤔
@@dougmhd2006That should make it easier to get the name. The LDS drops the name and UHC picks it up. 😂
@@dougmhd2006The next church president will probably re-embrace the term “Mormon”
They go back and forth on it
You think mormons would have a problem ?
A good example of a brand collaboration was the Seattle Kraken having a sponsorship agreement with Kraken Rum (which was likely an agreement with regard to existing trademark)
Didn’t know that. That’s a thing that Utah could do!
I for one am glad. I can’t tell you how many times I confuse a cooler with a professional hockey team.
This is a perversion of the process! No intelligent judge would believe a Texas based Yeti cooler company would be confused for a Utah Yeti Hockey Club!
One has to understand that the job of any federal agency is to intervene in good things lol.
It's over blown beurocracy, there is no sane or intelligent people in it, none. Look at your outgoing prez and your new prez and the menza candidates surrounding them in the senate and congress.
Overblown beurocracy is never a good thing.
I'd assume it was more of things like merchandise options there with standard things being things like the cups and coolers that I see for a lot of sports teams with team brandings
Imagine staring a business being so successful you become a corporation then another giant corporations just takes your name.
Like it or not it’s a fair ruling and is logical
The English language is very diverse there has to be one other word to use
@AzraelThanatos right you are. Most here unemployed typing with thumbs.
I hope the Yeti company hears about this and strikes a deal. What a cool partnership that would be.
"Oh no, I meant to buy a cooler but I bought 15 hockey season tickets instead. And I live in South Carolina!"
bahaha... good one!!
Utah tickets are that cheap?
@@MbisonBalrog no, but yeti coolers will cost you a months salary
Haha
@@MbisonBalrog no, a yeti cooler costs about $75,000
There is a "Red Wing Shoe" Company that has a similar logo as the Detroit "Red Wings". Also the SMU Mustangs have the exact same logo (in reverse) as the Ford Mustang. Has been that way since 1964. Why is that?
I dunno about the Red Wings but I would assume that when it comes to SMU they get away with using the mustang logo for the same reason you see all kinds of high schools with the exact logos of professional teams (my school ripped off the Michigan Panthers) and that is because most schools technically fall under "non-profit organizations" which allows them a legal loophole to get away with that kind of thing.
I looked into the Red Wing Shoe Company point the other day. Here's the thing. Both the Red Wing Shoe Company and the Detroit Red Wings are basically 100+ year old companies. They were both founded at a time when trademarking wasn't as prevalent as it is today. For more context: The Red Wing Shoe Company was founded in 1905. The Detroit Red Wings in 1926. Just like in the case of the YETI brand, the shoe company existed before the hockey team. However, the federal guidelines for trademarking had only just been standardized in 1905. But trademarking wasn't really a huge thing until The Trademark Act went into effect in 1946, 20 and 40 years after both brands had been established. I imagine they were both grandfathered in as they were well established brands at that point. And what are they going to do, tell one of the two companies that have already been around for decades that one of them has to change their name? This is a different scenario here where there is already an existing trademark in place with another trying to get approved for one.
As for the Mustang part of the debate, the two have zero in common other than the name. Ford trademarked a car model. Yeah, it's a huge brand nowadays that sells a lot more than just a car, But when it first came out it wasn't like that. They did sell similar products. In the case of the YETI, there will be some crossover with products. Heck, you can already buy YETI tumblers with any NHL team logo on it.
SMU has the same logo as the Calgary Stampeders
I’d think it wouldn’t be an issue since there’s the brand Stanley making cups and the actual Stanley Cup
Stanley cup came first, I believe and is named after a person. Which patent law doesn't apply
I actually like the name Mammoths! I think it’s a dope name, and I like the potential colors/ uniforms combination. However, what I really like is the potential mascot the team could have. Imagine a giant Mammoth, or a set of giant tusks hanging right below the scoreboard (or built into the scoreboard). Picture it, every time they score ice being shot out of tusks onto the fans. A lot of fans (especially kids), would want to go to the games just to see that alone.
Mammoth Mountain Ski Resort in California has enter the chat...
So Have; Dimitri Vegas, Moguai and Like Mike.
Me too
And there’s Swiss mountaineering company Mammut. The Utah equivalent is of course Black Diamond.
@ I actually think the Black Diamonds would be really cool. A little weird with the hockey/skiing thing, but I think people would get over that quickly and just have a really bad ass theme.
I would have thought the Smith's would have reached out to the Yeti company prior to submitting the application for trademark. I love the name!
Easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. I’m sure if they went to the company first it would’ve been a lot more legal work to get it approved
i'm sure it's tricky and has a LOT of layers
He haven't talk to Yeti company yet..
Think of the cross-over branding. Custom Yeti gear for the Yetis. Seems like a lost opportunity.
@@MrJoeycrackers Problems might arise if the Yeti company and the team eventually part ways over oh, I don't know - Money (unfortunately a common theme in many aspects of a franchise in the NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB for decades....).
They missed a massive opportunity by not even considering Utah Raptors.
There used to be two New York Giants and now we have the New York and San Francisco Giants. Then you have the New York and Winnipeg Jets, New York and Texas Rangers, UCLA and Boston Bruins, St Louis, Arizona, and Louisville Cardinals, Detroit, LSU, and Clemson Tigers, etc. This just makes no sense.
You also forgot the Edmonton Oilers and the Houston Oilers
Carolina and Florida Panthers
The only think I can think of is teams back in the early 1900's didn't register team names because they didn't sell merch and their nickname was durived from a combination of what the fan base called them and what the press called them in the papers. If you look at the transfer sheet between the RedSox and Yankees for Babe Ruth it says it was between Boston American League Baseball Club and American League Base Ball Club of New York.
@@David-b5m3c The Houston Oilers became the Tennessee Titans.
@@HighpointerGeocacher - But not before calling themselves the Tennessee Oilers first.
How about “The Salt Lake Insulated Drinking Vessels of Utah”?
I’m also a fan of Yeti drinkware and I find no confusion with Utah Yetis.
I’m sure that Diary Queen would be upset with them using the name “Blizzard”.
But it's not the same name. I dont think you are grasping how copyright law works.
Blizzard is video game company that Microsoft owns.
@ You are not grasping sarcasm…
Cock Robin / Prince Castle had it first but theirs was a sherbet drink
@@alanfox691okay, and Utah Yetis is not the same name as Yeti Coolers. It's similarity and possible confusion they're looking at, not if they're the exact same name.
So how do the Jets, Rangers, Giants, Panthers, Cardinals and Kings all exist in multiple Leagues? Do 6 teams have to change names?
The company that makes the Yeti drinkware and other products, has over 18 trademarks, so I knew it was very likely to be rejected.
Just go with Utah Bighorns! A bighorn sheep on a mountainside. That is a killer logo!
That is better than every name they proposed
No can do, Big Horn Corp is a power tool company while "Bighorn Company" is a consulting firm. I wouldn't want to buy a power drill or try to attend a meeting and accidentally find out I'm in the middle of a hockey game in Utah! 😰
I also liked Utah Goats with a pissed off mountain goat logo
Has the NHL not copyrighted Stanley cup?
Technically the trademark is on Lord Stanley's Cup
Do you see any other sports league using it? NO
@@michaelleroy9281 oh sorry, didn’t realize only sports leagues would be interested in the name Stanley cup. Surely a large water bottle company wouldn’t be either
daaaaang! good point
@@JD200_I said sports league not a bottle company
They need to pick the correct name: The Utah Hockey Jazz
Utah Suicidal Black Death Metal cuz there is already a Blues in STL
How about the SLC Punks?
Good. 'Yeti' has nothing to do with Utah or hockey and never felt as if much thought was put into that name.
I bought a Giants season ticket for the NFL but live in San Francisco.
The rejection of Utah Hockey Club sounds weird. What about NYCFC in MLS? or LAFC?
That’s a soccer thing not a hockey thing.
Similar to the Jacksonville Jaguars/Jaguar cars situation. Maybe Utah should make Yeti their official drink ware sponsor.
You might run into NHL sponsorship issues but don't quote me on that.
I've always liked Mammoth or Mammoths as a name
This. Mammoth has my vote.
That would be my pick also.
Unlike the Colorado Mammoth in the NLL, it would be better to me if it were pluralized in NHL Utah; Utah Mammoths.
I would take this over any remaining option for sure.
That was my second pick
Why not just grant the copyright useage for a title sponsorship with the Yeti brand…
The problem with that
is because sponsorship would only last for a limited time. What happens after that sponsorship ends
then we have the same issue again with copyright all sponsorship would do is kick the issue down the road a few years, but the problem is still there at some point
to be delt with.
@ I think a create deal with that built in for the lifetime of the team in Utah would be interesting. Give yeti a small stake in the team or similar.
As a UHC fan I'm glad because Yeti sounds like such a cringe name
Hopefully they can come to a coexistence deal with Yeti for the name.
The Tasmania Devils expansion Australian football club had to do something similar with Warner Bros. Apparently that became a lot easier after the WB lawyers found out it was an actual animal after Googling it.
MLS Austin FC’s primary jersey sponsor is YETI, and that word mark is displayed across their jersey.
Blizzard is a gaming company
Green Bay Blizzard is an indoor football team.
What about the Wendigo? Or specifically the Wasatch Wendigo. If you are unfamiliar look it up. Could make a pretty sweet logo.
Venom might be trade marked from Marvel/Sony for the Venom character would be my guess but can't say if that is true. My top 2 picks for a name was the Yeti and Mammoth.
If Utah Hockey Club was rejected then several MLS clubs better NOT have their name copyrighted. Those would include Charlotte FC, FC Cincinnati, Nashville SC, New York City FC, Austin FC, FC Dallas, and San Diego FC. Orlando City SC and St. Louis City SC would be questionable. If the patent office is saying that Utah would be the primary element and can’t be copyrighted, then that same standard would apply to at least seven MLS clubs.
MLS owners need to learn that America and Canada are NOT EUROPE, and need to get back to the standard naming procedures of America and Canada.
The Flames had a similar problem when they tried to name their AHL affiliate the Wranglers when Wrangler (the clothing brand) tried to block them. Big difference is that Calgary already had a hockey club in the past named the Wranglers.
Blizzard is a video game studio
Green Bay Blizzard is indoor football team.
Dairy Queen Blizzard
Whatever you do, get rid of "Hockey Club." This isn't Europe. That's beyond lame.
Euro's have bad traditions.
So it's okay to have the name Delta being used for a airline and also for water sink company. We got Domino Sugar and on Pizza come on now. Im going to guess the right hand hasn't been greased enough with enough money to say yes
Domino Sugar was involved in a legal dispute with Domino's Pizza in the 1970's.
This is karmic payback for Utah absurdly taking the name Jazz from New Orleans, then refusing for decades to relinquish it.
US Patent office needs to calm the F down. 😂 Although, every time I try to order a Blue Yeti microphone on Amazon, I get “confused” and end up with a Yeti water bottle! 😂😂
that's a GREAT point
Austin FC got paid millions to put "YETI" on their jerseys.
Yes but sponsorship does not last for eternity.
You're completely missing the entire point.
Jimmy from Chicago….love your content!…..😊😊😊
We have already seen this issue with the Atlanta Thrashers - and the hockey team beat the case against the Skate Magazine in that case.
This is a miracle. Yeti is an embarrassing name. I won’t wear anything with that name on it
Utah owners should have a meeting with Yeti owners and enter a brand licensing agreement. Hence, throw a few million their way for the right to use it.
I’d love for them to keep Utah Hockey Club.
I like the Mammoth to be honest.
@dfpelletier This longtime 🦈's fan (of 30 years😎💙) does too!!👍
Atlanta had a similar problem with Thrasher Magazine. Except the magazine sued to stop the use of ‘Atlanta Thrashers’.
Venom is the name of power drink.
I remember Brazil making EXACTLY this point about the branding confusion last spring lol
I’m confused. Professional sports teams in nearby Denver are named the Outlaws and the Mammoth (the later plays in a hockey arena). How are those names not a bigger issue than Yeti?
Two thoughts on this. The first, those are smaller market teams. Most people have never heard of the Colorado Mammoth or Denver Lacrosse teams. So that's not really an issue in my mind. The other is there is already several teams in the big 4 of sports that share mascot names. Heck, California has two in their state! The LA Kings and Sacramento Kings. There's also the New York and Texas Rangers, New York and San Francisco Giants, Carolina and Florida Panthers, just to name a few. And that't not to mention the college sports teams that play each other with the same names. Kentucky and Arizona Wildcats for example. Most of those teams have been established for decades, some more than a century.
At the end of the day these aren't final rulings. SEG has 3 months to prove their case. But will the YETI brand give them a fight over it? They are a $3.2 billion company, I imagine they will. Despite their size, I think they know they'd immediately lose out on SEO. It'll be hard to fight the NHL's size and reach there. And with a brand like YETI, their online presence will be a big deal to them. The question at the end of the day is will SEG want to take the path of least resistance or try and push forward in an uphill battle? These application rejections came several months ago in some cases. Yetis was actually a while ago. The 3 months for that appeal is almost over. On Jan 9 they reapplied for both Outlaws and Mammoth but not Yeti so it is looking like Yeti might be out.
Since the team wasn't going to finalize a name for the 2024-25 season anyway, perhaps they should've applied for the trademarks first, see which ones the P&T office green lit, THEN had a naming contest? I do like the Utah Mammoth though. Similar to Yeti, you get a great mascot that kids will probably like (make sure the tusks are short, curved, and pillow soft) and it is an intimidating creature to put on a jersey.
AND mammoths have a tie to Utah. Yeti is from Nepal and has nothing to do with utah
The Houston Astros were originally called the Houston Colt 45s, with the blessing of the firearms company. But, what I understand, things went sour shortly thereafter.
I always confuse the NFL’s Los Angeles football teams with Dodge cars.
Dodge doesn’t make Chargers any more, but they do make Ram (no s) trucks.
How 'bout COYOTES? I do believe there are Coyotes in Utah, last time I checked.
Can't use that name
@@nickb2912 - Because Bettman is a moron!
The trade mark office should take a look back at Stanley cause there is only 1 Stanley Cup
There is already a hockey team named the Yetis. It is in Vail, CO.
How come you can use Orlando SC, Nashville FC, Dallas FC, STL SC, ATL FC etc etc?
Makes me wish the trademark offices would put the kibosh on the 18 men's soccer teams that have disgraced this country (and Canada) with the Euro brainwashing!
LV should be the Outlaws, or Bandits.
Las Vegas once had an XFL and Arena Football team called the Outlaws.
My first guess on "Blizzard" being rejected is related to licensing for the NHL video games, and Activision Blizzard being a competitor to EA in the gaming space. But I do think that would be a bit of a stretch by the registrar's office.
"Venom" feels confusing to me because the first trademark that comes to mind is the Spider-Man character. Maybe the overlap is also video game-related, but that sounds like an even bigger stretch.
There are/were 2 indoor football teams called the Green Bay Blizzard and Amarillo Venom. Green Bay is one of the most successful teams in the IFL.
Amarillo meanwhile rebranded to the Dusters this off season as they needed to rebrand due to entering a new league and sharing too much branding with an existing team there.
Meanwhile Outlaws being available is hilarious considering the defending AFL champions and AF1 charter members are the Billings Outlaws.
Yeti is the main sponsor for Austin FC the MLS team here in Austin. The Yeti logo is large and across the chest of the Austin FC jersey. Since Yeti is involved in sports and sports apparel I can see why Yeti is trying to protect their brand.
There was a similar thing like this with Fremantle of the Australian Football League. Their nickname is the Dockers, but Levi's sued, so they couldn't use Fremantle Dockers on any of their branding, it had to be Fremantle Football Club, with the "unofficial nickname" of Dockers. About 14 years ago an agreement was reached and now they can use the Dockers name.
As for Blizzard, there is the game studio and in the case of Venom, it could be the Marvel trademark.
Yeti is the shirt front sponsor for Austin FC.
O.M.G.
Sponsorship is not for eternity.
If they can’t go with the name Yetis, I vote for the Outlaws.
I get why everyone is laughing at this. but it makes sense.
What happens when the Hockey team starts to release merch with 'Yeti' on it? The cooler company also has shirts with 'Yeti' on it. Sure. Not one is going to confuse the team with a cooler. But that's not what the issue is here. If the hockey team agreed to never sell or use any products with the word 'Yeti' on it that the cooler company currently does they might be allowed to use it. Might be a bit difficult to sell a team jersey without your team name on it though.
The confusion may also be that people think they're related. When they're not.
Yeti is an issue but for some reason Stanley Cups were never an issue!?
I always preferred the Utah Mamoths, it would make some nice plushies and cool mascot.
I wasn’t aware that the hockey club was going to put a picture of a cooler on their jerseys. This is stupid, it would be free advertising for both entities.
Tack on the HC at the end... Introducing the Utah Yeti HC
I can see why the name can not be used by the Utah team. They make souvenirs such as beverage cups with the name YETI or YETIS printed on them. People mike think the Utah beverage cups are YETI beverage cups.
Conflict of interest
in such a case as well.
i think the golden knights had an issue with copyright as well but that got worked out
Yeah, with the Army Black Knights at West Point.
There's also Kings (both NHL and NBA) and also King's (the delicious Hawaiian rolls)
They can't use the Black Diamonds because the Utah clothing company Black Diamond might object. I just ordered some gloves from them yesterday.
There is an outlaw audio would that present the same problem??
Feels like the simple solution is to have yeti be the company make any cups that the the hockey club produces. Unless there is an NHL deal for producing cups which is possible but something I’m unaware of.
Venom does the clothing products for the UFC. Blizzard is a game company. But they could sell cups with team name on it and thats where it has the issue
You have to be a fool to buy a Yeti. The technology is universal and available for as little as less than 1/3 the price.
I remember when I tried to buy Red Wings tickets for my buddies and I and ended up with 8 pairs of boots
What's crazy is that in Yeti's Canada website sells NHL licensed drinkware. These are not seen on the Yeti American site, where the big license there is the NFL and Austin FC. Make it happen, NHL. I would like a Utah Yeti Yeti Rambler.
Reminds me of when Baltimore got a CFL club and the NFL took them to court for using the "Stallions", close but not exact match for "Colts" and in a different league. Meanwhile Indianapolis don't have race horses.
Yeti should file an amicus brief to clear the path and lean into it with a exclusive mug in the merch shop or branding on the promo cups for beer/whatever. "Get your Yeti at the Yeti (Arena)"
They actually tried using Colts & got sued for that, Stallions is what they pivoted to afterwards in year 2. Baltimore Stallions was actually a better name imo.
If St Louis had won an expansion team instead of getting the Rams, they would have been the Stallions. STaLlions, after all.
Go Mammoth! Thats been my favorite all along 😁 Plus, it would work well with the current colors and would have an awesome mascot!
The draft is in June and they'll need their branding for the next season. They need to just pick another name...
Wouldn't that be a great collaboration between the 2 Yetis? They could be the official drinking cup of the Utah Yeti. A Yeti Yeti. As you said, go straight to the source and see if they could hash it out.
People are making fun about the supposed potential confusion, but you have to remember people are actually dumb and do not get the benefit of the doubt. That’s why everything has a warning on it now.
I actually agree with this. As someone in Utah, I went to Dick's Sporting Goods and there was Utah Hockey Club stuff right next to the Yeti display. So I can certainly see the confusion.
I've done plenty of trademark litigation. IMHO, it's a bad decision and has a chance of being overturned.
I agree, people need to have a high IQ to distinguish hockey team merchandise from hydro flasks and coolers at Sports stores.
That's so confusing. I wouldn't know whether I was watching a Hockey game or drinking coffee.
This is stupid. They are a hockey team, they aremt making competing water bottles. The term Yeti existed long before Yeti brand. Absolutely ridiculous.
the opportunities for merchandising partnership could also be lucrative
But only last at max 10 years, then after that, you have the same copyright problem.
@@alanfox691 I mean if there is a mutual benefit and good sales I don't see why they couldn't partner longer than that.
@@alanfox691 Im just saying if they see enough positive value from it then they would likely go through and continue a partnership I cannot speak for either side but I mean why not if its mutually beneficial.
Good… The club should keep the name Utah Hockey Club it sounds better than the Yeti or The Utah Yeti makes them sound like a comic book club
So if a town or state isn't enough of a distinguishing descriptor for a team name what do we do about all these Wildcat teams...
I like Outlaws for the name.
Vegas Outlaws will likely be the NBA Expansion team name
Utah Outlaws?? Sounds about as ridiculous as Utah Jazz
@@alesitercrimson24 Las Vegas outlaws is used by the A’s triple team other than Aviators and still use the name on special occasions
Super cheesy and little league sounding. Yeehaw cowboy tight jeans and cowboy hats just doesn’t seem cool at all. I love the team but will rock Utah hockey club jerseys for the rest of time if they choose Outlaws.
Venom Energy Drinks, owned by Dr Pepper, and the Dairy Queen Blizzard, only blizzard I’m aware of
marvel owns the name Venom but only in a Comic Book character
Green Bay Blizzard indoor football team.
@ oh forgot about them, wish they would have made it, they would have put a better fight to the rattlers… maybe
Blizzard Entertainment, creators of Warcraft and now owned by Microsoft. Can see a potential litigation there.
Venom from Marvel Comics
Blizzard is either a wrestler or a character from Mortal Kombat
In Heraldry there is a two step difference rule to register the heraldry. Just Call them the Sea Gulls.
What about Red Wing shoes? Shark vacuums? Denver Broncos vs. Ford Bronco? Washington Commanders vs. Jeep Commander? Sun Microsystems? Texas Rangers vs. New York Rangers? San Francisco Giants vs. New York Giants? Panthers and Panthers (and Panthers)? Jets and Jets? I don’t think people will be misled or confused and think this non-final ruling is ridiculous. But also, as a Coyotes fan, I love it.
The NHL is such a professional embarrassment. They literally cannot do ANYTHING right. And none of those names work for a pro team.
shouldve just kept Coyotes. Its not like its an Oilers, Jazz, Sonics deal where it doesnt make sense for the region, Coyotes are common in Utah
Can't use that name
@@nickb2912 - Because Bettman is an idiot!