Comments on: Garber comments show league, PNW fans heading for Cascadia Cup impasse

By: jelliot1978

jelliot1978 — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 21:13:27 +0000

great, thanks, if it doesn’t get resolved properly you can try to see if the other supporters groups would do something at the 20:04 mark (though to be honest I doubt Philly would do anything at that time frame because they sing ‘Im lookin over a 4 leaf clover’ at 2010).

By: randomhandle1

randomhandle1 — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:02:33 +0000

“Publicly” and “publically” are both acceptable.

Now, “pubicly,” on the other hand…

By: donkeygonga

donkeygonga — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:05:30 +0000

You are an idiot pensfan603!!!! MLS is not looking out for us! They want to trademark it for money and nothing else. Cascadia teams create cascadia merch ,which MLS wants and if they own the mark the supporters group will be sued by MLS will sue if any merch gets made. Also they want to get a corporate sponsor for the cup so MLS gets all the money and MLS had nothing to do with the cup. If the league folded the cup would still exist because the supporters will still be around to continue our traditions with our own amateur soccer team or a lower tier team that may exist in another league.

By: camjam3113

camjam3113 — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:41:58 +0000

Maybe, just maybe, before you hurl insults, you should read the article. The basis of your argument as I can tell, is that Cascadia cup should give up because MLS is just protecting it’s “rights”. From the article:

“With the recent creation of the Cascadia Cup Council — an umbrella organization that’s also seeking the U.S. and Canadian trademarks”

A trademark, just so you know, protects other companies from using something that can be legally claimed by a person/company. For example, Cascadia created the cup, owns the cup, and has no association with MLS. They don’t need any “protection”….. they’re doing that themselves.

Lastly, I’ve re read all of florean’s posts and I personally see no misuse of a “their” or a “there”. Might be a better idea to keep those insults to yourself next time.

By: pensfan603

pensfan603 — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:18:16 +0000

florean – Jan 19, 2013 at 4:54 AM
Good job on correctly using “their” and “there”. And punctuation. You’d think the league could afford to hire trolls with a grade school understanding of English. Perhaps that is why they need the sponsorship dollars for the Cascadia Cup.

Good thing the Seattle/Portland Fans know their grammar because they sure as hell dont know class

By: pensfan603

pensfan603 — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:15:20 +0000

I cant wait for some private company to steal it from you so then you can be like “oh we should of listened to garber”

By: pensfan603

pensfan603 — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:12:54 +0000

Don Garber “Now Just because you dont like a team doesnt mean you should boo their pick, this is about the players” *stairs at portland and Seattle fans*

By: pensfan603

pensfan603 — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:07:09 +0000

How are we the Juvenile ones, you are complaining cause mls wants to trademark the rights to a cup, they are trying ot help protect you and you some how take a offense to that like a buch of 5 year olds, I’m sorry but really the mls isnt trying to destroy your cup Don Garber wants to grow the sport. Stop acting like babies this is for the better of Cascadia and better for the MLS, they need a trademark and the MLS has to be involved in it, like i said before the best way is some kind of split just so the cascadia supports dont get offended, but the mls needs to be in on it or else they cant report on it, they cant say it on national tv, and what does that do for the sport it kills it, and if you do nothing about it, then some other private entity could steal the trademark and the MLS and Supports Groups would be left with nothing. Get over it this is a business and the mls needs to make money, and they need the trademark on the Cascadia cup for that.

By: florean

florean — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:02:13 +0000

Wow, I can’t believe the juvenile pro-MLS comments in this thread. Can anyone explain to me how the MLS owns something created by the fans 5 years before any of the teams involved joined MLS? I get it, there isn’t any way to justify MLS’ position. How about giving us an example of these entities trying to exploit the Cup that MLS is so keen to protect us against? Oh, you can’t do that, either. Well then, just continue insulting the supporter’s groups, MLS trolls.

By: florean

florean — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 09:54:02 +0000

Good job on correctly using “their” and “there”. And punctuation. You’d think the league could afford to hire trolls with a grade school understanding of English. Perhaps that is why they need the sponsorship dollars for the Cascadia Cup.

By: kb57

kb57 — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 07:44:18 +0000

Time for the Cascadians to grow up.

By: blaesings

blaesings — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 03:47:17 +0000

The Cup was created in 2004, prior to any of the three teams being involved with ML$.

By: blaesings

blaesings — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 03:46:06 +0000

OMG… publicly.

By: blaesings

blaesings — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 03:45:27 +0000

Via Twitter, Paulson has said he can’t speak publically, but has been in touch with the Timbers Army. (107ist)

By: blaesings

blaesings — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 03:44:10 +0000

Impasse? It’s not like we are having negotiations. Grabber is trying to steal something that is not his, and our supporters groups are telling him to back the F*@k away from our cup.

By: jelliot1978

jelliot1978 — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 01:15:45 +0000

Question, when was the Cascadia cup created? I think that the other supporters groups need to be reached out to so some protest can be done. It was done in Philly after NE kicked out members of the fort and it can be done for this can use the year it was created or something like that to mark when it is done.

By: jjkusowski

jjkusowski — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 01:03:18 +0000

I would really like to hear the opinion of the teams’ owners on this. Particularly Paulson and Roth.

By: corgster

corgster — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 01:03:17 +0000

You lose the argument claiming bad academies.

The Timbers were two years too late to MLS to start an academy and sign Eric Hurtado to an HG contract. He went seventh in yesterday’s draft.

By: pensfan603

pensfan603 — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 00:46:54 +0000

ya cause ya know that .7 tv rating really helps
The timbers, and sounders are important but they arent that important, there are tons of clubs in the mls that draw just as good of crowds, and portalnd and seattle both have bad youth academies and neither bring in big players, all they do is make a lot of money for them selfs not the league.
And i dont think the mls is trying to “offend” the fans they were just trying to keep the cup in tacks, and looking ofr the better of the league.

Anyways why should the league trust the Supports they cant even be adultish about voting for MLS goal of the year, or any mls poll, instead of voting for the proper choice you ust vote for your favorite team, i get team pride and all but come on.
Stuff like that is what makes the mls lose respect for the timbers and Sounders fans.

By: valiantdraws

valiantdraws — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 23:41:58 +0000

Also…Portland and Seattle ARE more important.

By: dws110

dws110 — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 23:24:44 +0000

It is offensive to the three supporters groups who actually created the Cascadia Cup (not the league, not the teams, just the three supporters groups) that MLS would attempt to trademark the Cup without letting the SG’s know.

It is offensive to assume that the three SG’s are incapable of protecting the image and reputation of the Cup, an image and reputation that the three SG’s alone are responsible for building in the first place, and that they would be incapable of doing so without MLS controlling the brand.

It is patently offensive to assume that the three SG’s would peddle sponsorship or marketing rights to THEIR CUP in the first place.

It is offensive in the extreme to assume that the three SG’s are primarily motivated by monetizing or exploiting their own trophy.

By: pensfan603

pensfan603 — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 23:02:58 +0000

If Garber tried to do this in any other sport it would have no affect but because its the mls it does. They try to buy the rights and The supporters some how find a way to take offense to that, to me its silly and in my mind the real bullies hear are the supporters who are using there leverage with the amount of fans they have their and pushing Garber around. If they were smart though they would resolve it in a 50/50 Buying of the Trade mark so the MLS, including nbc and whatever would have rights to it, but so that the supports for whatever reason would remain happy, because again for whatever reason they get way to offended by the mls trying to protect something of theirs. It really irks me that Don Garber does all this stuff for the supports and fans of the Sport and if he does the smallest thing to change it no matter what the intention fans like that jump on his ass. If they had Gary Betman, or any other commissioner their probably wouldnt be an mls they need to lighten up.
To me this is just another example of Portland and Seattle think they are better then the MLS as a whole and are more important. Need to get off their ego ride, Seattle Portland.

By: drchale

drchale — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 22:11:19 +0000

I’m sorry, but calling CenturyLink TurfField the greatest soccer stadium in the world is laughable.

By: valiantdraws

valiantdraws — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 22:09:17 +0000

I only suggest this is MLS wins out.

By: crnelson10

crnelson10 — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 21:30:42 +0000

This reeks of knee-jerk anti-corporatism. MLS isn’t monsato, guys.

By: dfstell

dfstell — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:51:22 +0000

First, I’m not really sure how MLS is going to be successful registering a trademark for this. In the US, they would have to show that they were the first to use the name with the associated products or services in interstate commerce. Clearly, MLS would have a hard time doing that because MLS hasn’t been using the name. Maybe Canadian laws are different?

I can see some point is managing the trademark better or at least ensuring that it is always well-managed. Even if the trademark isn’t registered, whoever is responsible for the name should be taking steps to stop bootleggers because if they don’t, they’ll lose the ability to prevent misuse of the name by someone they might really care about. Without a trademark, any two other clubs could decide to start playing for the Cascadia Cup. I know that the supporter’s laugh at the idea of something like that happening, but trust me….your cup isn’t THAT relevant. Given where soccer is in the United States, nobody knows what an Cascadia Cup is, so if some other group started using that name and found greater success with it, their usage might become the dominant one.

Even with all that….MLS loses massive points for style. I mean, all IP transactions should revolve around good and timely communication and they’re not doing that.

Or….maybe they’re just trolling the northwest supporter’s groups because it’s so easy?

By: dws110

dws110 — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:16:19 +0000

I don’t like the idea of the SG’s creating another Cup for the same reason I don’t like the idea of letting the bully get away with stealing lunch money.

By: wesbadia

wesbadia — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:10:40 +0000

I like that solution, too. May the best cup win. It has free market written all over it, and the fans (ie, consumers) decide what they like best.

By: charliej11

charliej11 — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:05:32 +0000

Amen, zoophagous

” much of the Cascadia Cup’s current (and future) prestige is tied to the league’s promotion of the trophy. ”

Wrong, because if MLS went belly up, the Cup would still go on
Wrong, because the rivalry had prestige 20 years before MLS
Wrong, because your looking that prestige it has in NY ( or where ever you live ), not the prestige is has in the greatest soccer stadium in the world ( CLink )
Wrong, because like zoophagous said we don’t care if it is prestigous to you.
*I will add…..You didn’t care in 1970s, 80s, 90s, or even the 2000s..and you won’t care if it becomes small time again.

By: florean

florean — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:00:49 +0000

Major League Soccer could create a replacement trophy, start promoting it, and slowly ween its three franchises away from any implicit promotion of something the league can’t control.

Perfect solution. MLS doesn’t steal something they didn’t create and don’t own, but instead get to create something themselves and have all the legal rights such creation entails. Here’s another solution: I’m sure the supporter’s groups would be willing to grant MLS a license to use the term in their promotion of the Cup. We just wouldn’t allow them to sell corporate sponsorship or merchandise.

You’re a journalist, right? The big question you should be asking is why did MLS only apply for a trademark in Canada? I suspect I know why: because in the US you have to swear under oath that you own the rights to the trademark. It is much easier to get it in Canada and then import it into the US. It’s a much lower bar. But I’d be curious what the league position is on that.