The biggest mistake this post makes is conflating the 'seal' of the uc system with its logo. And adding insult to injury, the article also completely ignores th

The biggest mistake this post makes is conflating the 'seal' of the uc system with its logo. And adding insult to injury, the article also completely ignores the other designed treatments for the logo. How will the logo appear 90% of the time? Scrubbing to 1:44 seems to give the biggest clue, which indicates that the resultant 'system' is actually a series of font choices and a logo and a system for picking out colors or images which can be used within the confines of the logotype. Scrubbing back to ~1:30 also indicates that this will also redesign http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu which will likely be a huge improvement over the existing website that appears to have been made at the height of the xhtml+prototype.js zeitgeist. So no, Cal isn't being rebranded, the nebulous 'UC system' is, which means that the biggest consumers of this logo will be UC applicants & employees along with secondary school juniors and seniors who are receiving either fat packets or skinny envelopes with a UC logo strategically positioned in various parts. Will this logo appear on a diploma? almost certainly not. Will it appear on a paystub or employee badge? probably? It's frustrating that most people project their fears and worries on a graphic mark but it's even more frustrating that the author ignored the actual identity's presentation.