No matter how strong the resemblance to kites (and I am not disputing this), I'm still calling it a logo-design FAIL for using something that resembles one of the most famous and all-pervading visual images for a long while? In my opinion, once something like the Angel of the North is created, it establishes a kind of unofficial trademark if you like -- it claims its own entry in the visual lexicon of the age. I would expect artists and designers to be more clued up than this and not subsequently create work which makes deliberate -- or naïve -- visual reference to it. ("Post-modern" "irony" notwithstanding). ...perhaps we should really be questioning the validity of the 'Angel' as a unique/original icon... Perhaps at the same time we could question the validity of using sacred Maori objects as the basis for logos?