Chief Illiniwek Not Offensive To His Designer

April 6, 2007 – 2:10 pm by Ryan Phillips

Graphic artist Jack Davis is not exactly pleased with the University of Illinois’ decision to get rid of Chief Illiniwek. He designed the logo depicting the controversial mascot 27 years ago, and now he wants it back. According to his attorney, Davis sent a letter to the university on March 14 asking them to return it.

Davis sold the logo to the university in 1980 for $210 and his attorney claims he offered it “as long as it would be used as a permanent symbol of Illinois athletics.” The university asked Davis to submit documents supporting his claim and has now said they believe he has no right to the logo.

The university’s board of trustees ruled last week that it would retain ownership of the logo, despite their decision to stop using the chief’s image, name and outfit.

According to school officials, the logo generates hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for the school through the sale of T-shirts and other merchandise.

As most of you know, Illinois recently sent Chief Illiniwek to the happy hunting grounds because some American Indians, the NCAA, other activist groups and bad dancers found it demeaning.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

  1. 9 Responses to “Chief Illiniwek Not Offensive To His Designer”


    By Killer Carlson on Apr 8, 2007

  3. hope he does get it back. screw the liberals and lefties that want to kill off our proud names and traditions. you idiots do realize illinois is named after a tribe? you want to kill that off too? or are you too busy in the bathhouse?

    By Anonymous on Apr 8, 2007

  4. ummm…anonymous above me, I don’t think you understand things too well.
    First of all, there was never an Illini tribe, it was a loose confederation of tribes that only got past their hate for each other to unite against the people who now call Illinois home. Second, how do the “liberals and lefties” win if he DOES get it back, since, you know, the university will never be able to display the symbol on anything ever again.
    As for the symbol, it’s pretty clear cut. If he can prove he sold it to them under the circumstances he claims he did, then it’s his. Nothing else to it. I’m rooting for him, but he might be a hack who’s looking for some random publicity.

    By Anonymous on Apr 8, 2007

  5. Anonymous #1,
    Where in this did we display any favor to one side or the other? We just told you what’s going on, didn’t say who was right or who was wrong or where we stood on it. And when did we say we wanted to kill off a tribe or any traditions? Really, nothing in your comment makes sense.

    By Phillips on Apr 8, 2007

  6. there was never an illini tribe? i’m a descendant of the tribe, you schmuck.
    what a dumbass you are. if you people knew anything about native american history, you’d understand how becoming a proud warrior is important to us (just like any other culture.) and when a school takes away a symbol of a native american warrior, well it shows they know nothing about us.
    liberals and lefties, the anti-war cowardly types, win by denying us exposure and going with soft, p***y symbols.
    the illinois river was named from the tribe, from which the state is named. learn your history people

    By Anonymous on Apr 9, 2007

  7. no better way to make your point than to bring senseless political bias into it.
    and no, there never was a specific illini tribe. the wonderful site you provided doesn’t even give native americans the proper respect by listing any of the individual tribes among the illini confederation, it just generalizes them all into the one group. i’m sure all the people who came from the Kaskaskia, Peoria, Cahokia and other tribes are real happy their names are being forgotten/ignored.

    By orange and blue on Apr 9, 2007

  8. To Anonymous..
    From your source..
    The Illinois or Illiniwek Indians–was a collection of twelve tribes that occupied a large section of the central Mississippi River valley, including most of what is today Illinois.

    By Anonymous on Apr 27, 2007

  9. The university has been forced to yield to blackmail. The death of the Chief epitomizes some unsavory aspects of contemporary American public life: political correctness, hypocrisy and bureaucratic tyranny.
    Only a small minority of Native Americans is shown by polls to oppose Indian nicknames in sports. The campaign against them gained momentum only when the NCAA, which can hardly cope with policing athlete misconduct and illegal payments in college sports, crusaded against dozens of colleges in the name of political correctness.

    By Stone on Apr 27, 2007

  10. That is true what people are saying about the Illini Confederation. The U of I’s nickname (“Fighting Illini” and/or “Illini”) has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with American Indians. “Illini” means someone who is from Illinois and “Fighting” wasn’t added until after World War I to honor those who faught in the Great War (look at the outstide of MEMORIAL Stadium sometime). However, Chief Illiniwek IS an Illini Indian, because not only was he the leader of the Illini Confederation, he is an INDIAN FROM ILLINOIS. I’m pretty sure that makes you an Illini Indian. Come on people, the Native Americans are fine with it, the vast majority is fine with it and the only people who hate it are these “self appointed spokespeople” who think they’re “saving” these minorities. It is only a matter of time before people are complaining about how American Indian culture is being forgotten, yet they are destroying some of the last reminders we have of Illinois’ rich Indian history. In 30 to 50 years, people will be yelling at the NCAA and saying how “inconsiderate” they’re being for not honoring Native Americans in sports and how they’re not doing anything to fix the problem that they brought upon themselves. When that time comes, people will not view the U of I, FSU, North Dakota and others as “hostile and abusive” universities, but rather as honorable, respectful universities that saw to “the end of the tunnel” and saw past this dark age of political correctness.

    By Anonymous on May 2, 2007

Post a Comment