US Patent Office cancels Redskins trademark

[Fingon]

I just don't understand the attachment to the team name. It's clearly something that offends a segment of the population... is a team name really that important to your enjoyment of the game?

 

If the Bills changed their name tomorrow, I'd still be a fan of the team.

Of course the name should be changed, just don't expect it to be because of this case. The Feds bungled the last one and the dissenting opinion this time says they did no better. We'll find out on appeal, but don't expect much nor for this to be resolved quickly. The last time it took 4 years.

[Dorkington]

Of course the name should be changed, just don't expect it to be because of this case. The Feds bungled the last one and the dissenting opinion this time says they did no better. We'll find out on appeal, but don't expect much nor for this to be resolved quickly. The last time it took 4 years.

 

Oh, I don't think this will do it. But I think this, with mounting pressure, and maybe some other action, will lead to a change at some point. Assuming the pressure doesn't let up anytime soon. I don't think there's legally much that can be done to force the name change.

[Fingon]

Care to make a wager on that?

I try not to bet on things almost a half decade in advance.

[Dirtbag]

It was reversed because there was no evidence. The government didn't even try to show that the majority of Native Americans find the name disparaging.

not according to the ap: "The decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board is similar to one it issued in 1999. That ruling was overturned in 2003 in large part on a technicality after the courts decided that the plaintiffs should have filed their complaint soon after the Redskins registered their nickname in 1967."

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/article/20140618/AP/306189697/1004

[Fingon]

not according to the ap: "The decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board is similar to one it issued in 1999. That ruling was overturned in 2003 in large part on a technicality after the courts decided that the plaintiffs should have filed their complaint soon after the Redskins registered their nickname in 1967."

 

http://www.buffalone.../306189697/1004

 

"The Court concludes that the [board’s] finding that the marks at issue ‘may disparage’ Native Americans is unsupported

by substantial evidence, is logically flawed, and fails to apply the correct legal standard to its own findings of fact"

 

http://files.redskin...on-Redskins.pdf

Edited June 18, 2014 by Fingon

[Rocky Landing]

"The Court concludes that the [board’s] finding that the marks at issue ‘may disparage’ Native Americans is unsupported

by substantial evidence, is logically flawed, and fails to apply the correct legal standard to its own findings of fact"

 

http://files.redskin...on-Redskins.pdf

Judging from past Washington Skins' press releases on the subject of their name, I wouldn't assume they are definitive. Edited June 18, 2014 by Rocky Landing

[26CornerBlitz]

From the 2003 decision: https://web.williams...edskinscase.htm

 

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued the ruling in connection with a 1999 decision by a panel of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. But she also made clear that her ruling does not address the issue of whether the name "Redskins" actually is offensive to Indians.

 

In her 84-page decision, issued late Tuesday, Kollar-Kotelly also found that the activists waited too long to make their claims under the law, which was in effect when the Redskins trademarks were registered in 1967. Kollar-Kotelly criticized the trademark board for improperly relying on testimony from several linguists, which she said was too inconclusive. She also chastised the board for basing its decision in part on a 1996 survey of American Indians that concluded a majority found the term "Redskin" offensive.

Edited June 18, 2014 by 26CornerBlitz

[BuffaloBud]

I wonder if this will be more fuel to having my high school (Lancaster) change its nickname.

[B-Man]

The team has released a statement saying the panel’s decision “will have no effect at all on the team’s ownership of and right to use the Redskins name and logo.” The team notes similar decision’s have been made in the past, and provides headlines forecasting the end of the team’s name dating back to 1999 and 2003.

We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s divided ruling will be overturned on appeal. This case is no different than an earlier case, where the Board cancelled the Redskins’ trademark registrations, and where a federal district court disagreed and reversed the Board.

 

As today’s dissenting opinion correctly states, “the same evidence previously found insufficient to support cancellation” here “remains insufficient” and does not support cancellation.

 

This ruling – which of course we will appeal – simply addresses the team’s federal trademark registrations, and the team will continue to own and be able to protect its marks without the registrations. The registrations will remain effective while the case is on appeal.

 

 

.

[KollegeStudnet]

The Washington Thereiswaysnextyears

[The Real Buffalo Joe]

This may have been posted somewhere already, but it seems appropriate for this original thread on the Redskins team name.

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sportspickle.com%2F2013%2F10%2Fideas-for-washington-redskins-name-by-your-uncle&ei=YsehU-f8B8epyASRkYHACQ&usg=AFQjCNFufMoFNlIBdu40JP85LNhY7eSrHA&bvm=bv.69137298,d.aWw

[KD in CA]

In general anything that pisses off Dan Snyder is good, but politicians using the U.S. Patent Office to enforce politically correct whims of the day is pretty ridiculous.

[26CornerBlitz]

In general anything that pisses off Dan Snyder is good, but politicians using the U.S. Patent Office to enforce politically correct whims of the day is pretty ridiculous.

The complaint that the USPTO made a ruling on was brought by politicians?

[KD in CA]

The complaint that the USPTO made a ruling on was brought by politicians?

 

Oh come on....you aren't really that naive, are you? You really can't see the behind the scenes maneuvering here in the decision making process?

[Damian]

And our favorite team is named after a man who killed many Native Americans during the Indian War...

[C.Biscuit97]

And our favorite team is named after a man who killed many Native Americans during the Indian War...

 

As long as they stay in Buffalo, I don't care what the name is. Go back to Braves. Bills is sort of stupid in the first place.

[Rocky Landing]

Oh come on....you aren't really that naive, are you? You really can't see the behind the scenes maneuvering here in the decision making process?

Conspiracy!!!

[Kirby Jackson]

Geeze, I never would have expected this thread to spin off into a political debate where everyone "votes along party lines." The same thing happened when I went to the Michael Sam thread to discuss his merits as a football player. Everyone just wanted to talk about what it would be like to be in a locker room full of naked men.

[Luxy312]

Anyone that doesn't see this as a highly politicized issue really isn't paying attention. If anyone doesn't happen to be aware, there are over 1,000 high schools (including some on Indian reservations) that carry mascot names that could be considered disparaging to Indians. Redskins, Braves, Indians, Warhawks, Redhawks, Redbirds, and many others. There's only one reason the Washington Redskins are getting so much attention and media. They're big business while these other places are not. When you ask yourself whether there is an unfair amount of media on this NFL franchise, ask yourself how much attention the Carthage Redman are getting. The answer should be pretty obvious.

[KD in CA]

Your political biases aside, this issue has been around since the 1980's. It's hardly some "whim of the day" as you call it. Everything in my world is not some naked left or right issue.

 

Actually I haven't introduced any political bias into the discussion and if you could've taken a moment because offering your knee-jerk response, you might have noticed the two Senators who recently called on the NFL to change the name were from opposite political parties. The timing of that action with a ruling on an issue that (supposedly) has around since the 1980s goes well beyond suspicious.

 

Given your well worn crusade on this topic, it's no surprise that you can't acknowledge or discuss anything outside of your pre-programmed view.