Maloofs have trademarked domain name for Los Angeles Royals.com(something like that)

B

BMiller52

All-Star
#3
#3
Gary said:
Yah.. We know they are gone.. Which nail is this one? Second to last or last one that is in the coffin?
Click to expand...
We can still send letters/emails to owners of the other 29 teams urging them to vote no. Honestly this is just messed up, the Maloofs are trash IMO and I hate them. They are taking away a team from a group of fans who love them and puting it someplace where the people dont even want them. This is not fair. WTF am I supposed to do, be a warriors fan? I dont even like the warriors.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#4
#4
BMiller52 said:
http://www.news10.net/news/story.aspx?storyid=128672&catid=2

Wow and they even used a Sacramento lawyer. What a traitor! These guys are grade a jerks.:mad:
Click to expand...
Nothing new here. They've been in discussions with Anaheim for a while now and we know it.

I'm not surprised they wanted to tie up potential domain names. If word had gotten out, someone else could have snapped up those domain names and forced the Maloofs to pay them for the rights, if the Maloofs wanted them. That sort of thing has happened to businesses. Just a pre-emptive move that protects their rights to use those domain names, if they want them. Doesn't mean they are using them for sure.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#7
#7
I really don't understand the hate for the Maloofs. They are not perfect human beings, but they are pretty good owners. They could have left ten years ago when they gained control of the franchise.

They are not running the Kings as a charity, folks. Sacramento has known for fourteen years since (before the Maloofs bought in) the franchise wanted and then needed a new arena. Did people really think the team would stay forever with no new arena?
 
kingsboi

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#10
#10
Whoa whoa whoa, now slow down there, LA Royals? WTF???? Noooo come on now, why in god's green earth do you need THREE, I repeat...THREE teams with Los Angeles infront of their name, what is wrong with Anaheim Royals? That would be 1000x better. For the love of god, I don't care about them moving or anything like that but this def. got me pissed off if it's true, let's hope to G.O.D. it is not!
 
ReinadelosReys

ReinadelosReys

Starter
#11
#11
kennadog said:
I really don't understand the hate for the Maloofs. They are not perfect human beings, but they are pretty good owners. They could have left ten years ago when they gained control of the franchise.

They are not running the Kings as a charity, folks. Sacramento has known for fourteen years since (before the Maloofs bought in) the franchise wanted and then needed a new arena. Did people really think the team would stay forever with no new arena?
Click to expand...
People really forget how long a new arena has been discussed. I remember sitting at my kitchen table marveling at mockups of a potential new arena in the Bee almost 7-8 years ago. Unfortunately, all the major players of the past failed to step up to the challenge :(
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#12
#12
Yes, the article says the city would require any team to bear the Anaheim name, if they play in the Honda Center. I'm sure they were really ticked off about the stupid "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" name.

It's similar to the Warriors, who qere the San Francisco Warriors until they moved to the Oakland arena. Then they re-named the team the Golden State Warriors. A bit of an insult to Oakland, I thought at the time.
 
Section 101

Section 101

All-Star
#13
#13
kingsboi said:
Whoa whoa whoa, now slow down there, LA Royals? WTF???? Noooo come on now, why in god's green earth do you need THREE, I repeat...THREE teams with Los Angeles infront of their name, what is wrong with Anaheim Royals? That would be 1000x better. For the love of god, I don't care about them moving or anything like that but this def. got me pissed off if it's true, let's hope to G.O.D. it is not!
Click to expand...
Actually, they may not be able to use Royals at all. Major League baseball may have exclusive rights at this point. Yes they had the name before but that was what 40 years ago. MLB went after little league teams, dont think they wont go after another pro team.
 
S

Superman

All-Star
#18
#18
kennadog said:
Nothing new here. They've been in discussions with Anaheim for a while now and we know it.

I'm not surprised they wanted to tie up potential domain names. If word had gotten out, someone else could have snapped up those domain names and forced the Maloofs to pay them for the rights, if the Maloofs wanted them. That sort of thing has happened to businesses. Just a pre-emptive move that protects their rights to use those domain names, if they want them. Doesn't mean they are using them for sure.
Click to expand...
You're right, but this is different from registering a domain name. This is trademarking a team name. While one is relatively simple and can be done for a few bucks online, the other involves intellectual property and has to be filed with the federal government.
 
S

Superman

All-Star
#19
#19
Section 101 said:
Actually, they may not be able to use Royals at all. Major League baseball may have exclusive rights at this point. Yes they had the name before but that was what 40 years ago. MLB went after little league teams, dont think they wont go after another pro team.
Click to expand...
From what I remember, MLB going after little league teams had to do with using the name, the logo, the colors, the uniforms, etc. Not just the name. Still petty, but different. I don't think MLB has exclusive rights to team names throughout the sports world, particularly if the team is in a different city and isn't using any of MLB's intellectual property.

As a matter of fact, the Arizona Cardinals and New York Giants would probably have something to say about that.
 
Last edited:
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#20
#20
Superman said:
You're right, but this is different from registering a domain name. This is trademarking a team name. While one is relatively simple and can be done for a few bucks online, the other involves intellectual property and has to be filed with the federal government.
Click to expand...
My mistake as Section101 pointed out, too.

It still doesn't surprise me at all that they would have moved to protect a potential trademark, either. Especially since they may need it, more likely than not.
 
Section 101

Section 101

All-Star
#21
#21
Superman said:
From what I remember, MLB going after little league teams had to do with using the name, the logo, the colors, the uniforms, etc. Not just the name. Still petty, but different. I don't think MLB has exclusive rights to team names throughout the sports world, particularly if the team is in a different city and isn't using any of MLB's intellectual property.

As a matter of fact, the Arizona Cardinals and New York Giants would probably have something to say about that.
Click to expand...
Trademark is still less than a grand, well maybe not what they are paying their attorneys. But it can be done for under $500 by common folk.
 
Section 101

Section 101

All-Star
#22
#22
Superman said:
From what I remember, MLB going after little league teams had to do with using the name, the logo, the colors, the uniforms, etc. Not just the name. Still petty, but different. I don't think MLB has exclusive rights to team names throughout the sports world, particularly if the team is in a different city and isn't using any of MLB's intellectual property.

As a matter of fact, the Arizona Cardinals and New York Giants would probably have something to say about that.
Click to expand...
Both the Cards and Giants have been around a long time already and the name has always been in use. Now what if they wanted to call them the Anaheim Yankees or Red Sox. Dont you think MLB would go after them?
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#23
#23
Oh, for heaven's sake slow down folks. Of course they are doing that. I am sorry but I won't read this thread because I think that is foolishness. What would you think they would do? It's the least of their problems.

I think the name sucks but so be it. I wonder what the friendly fans of Anaheim will think of that.
 
Section 101

Section 101

All-Star
#24
#24
Glenn said:
Oh, for heaven's sake slow down folks. Of course they are doing that. I am sorry but I won't read this thread because I think that is foolishness. What would you think they would do? It's the least of their problems.

I think the name sucks but so be it. I wonder what the friendly fans of Anaheim will think of that.
Click to expand...
It's really the first step in the move process. They can't move forward with out the name.
 
sk4ever

sk4ever

G-League
#25
#25
I don't see this as a big deal. The media is taking any information they can get to hook an audience. As far as the website goes, they will have one at the nba site anyway. Someone just registered it because it's cheap. As for the trademark, that's not very expensive either. Last night channel 13 hooked me by saying " we have new information right from the NBA that could keep the Kings here another year". Turned out to be old info they just put a spin on it to make it more dramatic.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/03/15/timeline-may-halt-kings-move-out-of-sacramento/
 
S

Superman

All-Star
#27
#27
Section 101 said:
Both the Cards and Giants have been around a long time already and the name has always been in use. Now what if they wanted to call them the Anaheim Yankees or Red Sox. Dont you think MLB would go after them?
Click to expand...
I don't think they'd try to name themselves the Anaheim Yankees, that's just dumb. Red Sox also has regional ties, so that's not relevant.

It's possible that if they used a name that's been exclusively MLB for years, the MLB would have grounds, but the fact that the NBA had a team named the Royals as recently as 1972, and that team predates the baseball Royals by at least 24 years, I don't think MLB would have a leg to stand on. A) It's not their intellectual property; B) it's not and never has been an exclusive nickname.

I wouldn't be surprised if MLB brought charges if in fact the Kings tried to change their name back to Royals, but I doubt any court would rule in their favor. It's not for me to decide, of course, just seems baseless, given the circumstances.
 
S

Superman

All-Star
#29
#29
Section 101 said:
$20 for private !

But even if it's a few grand for the trademark thats nothing comparted to the $150 + mil to move.
Click to expand...
No, you're right. I'm just saying, I could register any domain name with a few keystrokes and a debit card. It's more difficult to file a trademark. Either way, it's not really meaningful information.
 
S

Superman

All-Star
#30
#30
Glenn said:
I wonder what the friendly fans of Anaheim will think of that.
Click to expand...
OC natives would appreciate that, as they didn't like when the Angels renamed themselves "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim." It would be taken as a sign of respect for the region, instead of just another LA team. There's a comment in the article from an Anaheim resident to that effect. You'd have seen that if you had read the article...

;) Just toyin'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.