|
http://thinkprogress.org/default/2014/06/18/3450333/in-landmark-decision-us-patent-office-cancels-trademark-for-redskins-football-team/ The United States Patent and Trademark Office has canceled six federal trademark registrations for the name of the Washington Redskins, ruling that the name is “disparaging to Native Americans” and thus cannot be trademarked under federal law that prohibits the protection of offensive or disparaging language. The U.S. PTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board issued a ruling in the case, brought against the team by plaintiff Amanda Blackhorse, Wednesday morning. “We decide, based on the evidence properly before us, that these registrations must be cancelled because they were disparaging to Native Americans at the respective times they were registered,” the board wrote in its opinion. “The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board agreed with our clients that the team’s name and trademarks disparage Native Americans. The Board ruled that the Trademark Office should never have registered these trademarks in the first place,” Jesse Witten, the plaintiffs’ lead attorney, said in a press release. “We presented a wide variety of evidence – including dictionary definitions and other reference works, newspaper clippings, movie clips, scholarly articles, expert linguist testimony, and evidence of the historic opposition by Native American groups – to demonstrate that the word ‘redskin’ is an ethnic slur.” “I am extremely happy that the [Board] ruled in our favor,” Blackhorse said in a statement. “It is a great victory for Native Americans and for all Americans. We filed our petition eight years ago and it has been a tough battle ever since. I hope this ruling brings us a step closer to that inevitable day when the name of the Washington football team will be changed. The team’s name is racist and derogatory. I’ve said it before and I will say it again – if people wouldn’t dare call a Native American a ‘redskin’ because they know it is offensive, how can an NFL football team have this name?” The Trial and Appeals Board previously rescinded the team’s trademark protections as part of a case filed in 1992. A federal court later overturned the ruling on appeal due to a technicality that the plaintiffs say has been fixed in this most recent case.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 02:41 |
|
|
Countdown to Cafe Press Redskins shirt empires being built.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
Initial thoughts: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:04
|
|
|
Hahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:04
|
|
|
About time. Hopefully this is what will ultimately end up forcing the change, since Snyder isn't going to do it himself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
As if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, "my #brand!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
Guys I'm selling shirts for $10 just paypal me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
Wait, wait. So how does this affect Dan Snyder's Washington Redskins Original Americans Foundation?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
Doesn't this mean you could legally make and sell bootleg Redskins t-shirts now?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
Time for my Seattle-based yukon gold potato business to swoop in and get it. For real though, this is huge. gently caress that stupid racist-rear end name. Good on the government.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
Countdown to the Washington Lobbyists RG3 jersey being a best seller.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
Thauros posted:Doesn't this mean you could legally make and sell bootleg Redskins t-shirts now? Go hog wild.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
The trademark was canceled because it was offensive "at the time it was registered" so hopefully Dan submitted a new request before someone else does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
Thauros posted:Doesn't this mean you could legally make and sell bootleg Redskins t-shirts now? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
Still laughing at the patent office being the ones that will force a name change.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
Time to start guessing new names, then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:The trademark was canceled because it was offensive "at the time it was registered" so hopefully Dan submitted a new request before someone else does. You really think they're going to find that it's not offensive now?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Thauros posted:Doesn't this mean you could legally make and sell bootleg Redskins t-shirts now? I believe so! But Snyder will appeal this, and during that (I have no idea, unemployed lawyers help) the court will probably put an injunction against the sale of items until that appeal is heard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Harlock posted:As if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, "my #brand!" It's just one voice, the voice of Darren Rovell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
You have one choice, Snyder:
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Ozu posted:Still laughing at the patent office being the ones that will force a name change. It did almost happen back in the 90's, but the case was thrown out on a technicality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
I don't think this forces anything. If anything it kind of forces Snyder into keeping it, or else it makes it look like he cares more about t shirt sales than allegations of racism. I mean I know he's incapable of shame and all, but still.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:I don't think this forces anything. If anything it kind of forces Snyder into keeping it, or else it makes it look like he cares more about t shirt sales than allegations of racism. I mean I know he's incapable of shame and all, but still. He's #1 an rear end in a top hat who is used to getting his way, always, and #2 a tightwad who doesn't want to pay to have millions of dollars in redskins stuff thrown out including pens and clipboards.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:I don't think this forces anything. If anything it kind of forces Snyder into keeping it, or else it makes it look like he cares more about t shirt sales than allegations of racism. I mean I know he's incapable of shame and all, but still. When he has to sell T-shirts for $10-$15 to compete with all the dudes selling them outside the stadium, he won't care what it looks like, he'll care about the fact he's losing millions per year. quote:He's #1 an rear end in a top hat who is used to getting his way, always, and #2 a tightwad who doesn't want to pay to have millions of dollars in redskins stuff thrown out including pens and clipboards. If and when they change the name, there's no way they won't be able to sell the rest of the stuff as "vintage."
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
Snyder will fight this as much as possible, but there's no way the NFL will let a team logo/name be unprotected. E: I don't give the slightest of shits about the name being offensive. Snyder should only change the name if it costs him money, which this makes it do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
Washington Birdmen
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
So if I'm reading this right, the original case against the name was filed in 1992, Washington lost, but won on appeal on a technicality in 1999, and then this most recent case was filed in 2006. That's pretty impressively slow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:When he has to sell T-shirts for $10-$15 to compete with all the dudes selling them outside the stadium, he won't care what it looks like, he'll care about the fact he's losing millions per year. Is there any reason he can't keep the logo trademarked? There's nothing remotely offensive about the logo, unless we want to make the argument "Anything resembling a human being is, by law, offensive".
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:You really think they're going to find that it's not offensive now? I think they're going to try.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:23
|
|
|
Detroit_Dogg posted:Washington Birdmen I like the Washington Shinobi, personally.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:23
|
|
|
Great White Hope posted:Is there any reason he can't keep the logo trademarked? There's nothing remotely offensive about the logo, unless we want to make the argument "Anything resembling a human being is, by law, offensive". I suppose so, but stylized city/team shirts and hats without logos also sell pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Dan Snyder registered "Washington Warriors" a long time ago. That would still continue using an Indian moniker probably, which I think would be a mistake. Do the right thing, Snyder. "Washington Red Pandas"
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Currently in talks with a printer to start making posters of this totally legal image whoops cropping, well whatever you get the "joke"
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
Washington Bengazis
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
Washington Anti-Air Defense System That's Supposed to Protect the Pentagon
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
If they do have to make a change they should just call themselves "Washington" and stick with a generic W logo, that way the fans can just call them what they want.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
Kalli posted:So if I'm reading this right, the original case against the name was filed in 1992, Washington lost, but won on appeal on a technicality in 1999, and then this most recent case was filed in 2006. Washington F-35's
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:If they do have to make a change they should just call themselves "Washington" and stick with a generic W logo, that way the fans can just call them what they want. The Washington What-The-gently caress-Evers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:If they do have to make a change they should just call themselves "Washington" and stick with a generic W logo, that way the fans can just call them what they want. Washington FC
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 02:41 |
|
|
Washington Bullets
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 15:31
|
|