Patent office cancels Redskins' trademarks, ruling it's 'disparaging'


#1

msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/patent-office-cancels-redskins-trademarks-rules-disparaging-to-native-americans-061814?cmpid=msn%3Afoxsports%3Aansfox11

Now that President Obama has brought this matter to a conclusion, maybe he can do something about, high unemployment, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, the Crimean peninsula, terrorism, high unemployment, high taxes leading businesses to leave the country, high unemployment, crushing debt levels, health care reform failures, rising prices, a realistic energy policy, a variety of active scandals in his administration, and high unemployment.

Maybe his next priority will concern the Fighting Irish trademark held by Notre Dame. It implies bad behavior rather than just a physical trait. As a person of 1/4 Irish descent, I never thought it disparaged me before, buy now maybe I should apply for damages, as long as my settlement would not be used to purchase Irish Whiskey, which would also apply to a negative stereotype.

Besides, Bronzeskins would be a little more accurate than Redskins.


#2

Nice to see the feds stamping out legally granted trademarks of private citizens. Regardless of where you come down on the Redskins nonsense, this should trouble any person who could one day see themselves at the mercy of the feds.

I hope they go after Notre Dame next, since disparaging is such a vague, meaningless term.


#3

Remarkable the level of authoritarian arrogance the regime demonstrates.

Lebanon Valley College in Annville, Pa. uses the name and logo, Flying Dutchmen. I guess as a born Pennsylvania German, I ought to take them to the patent office.

Jon


#4

I am a die-hard unrepentant belligerent New England Patriots fan; but I’ll be ordering a Washington Redskins t-shirt so I can wear it after this mockery of “justice” comes to pass.

This BS politically correct culture we live in nauseates me. I think my fellow football fans will agree with me in supporting the Redskins.

If I were Dan Snyder, I’d say to anyone who wants to use the Redskins name and logo; “go ahead and make all the Redskins gear you want. Flood the market.” Even if the NFL or the idiocracy in D.C. in Washington get their way, they’ll never be able to silence the majority who think this whole issue stinks.

Hail to the Redskins.


#5

I am an Eagles fan, and I (gag, cough, sputter) agree with you. (I’m just thankful they didn’t go after the Cowboys :eek:, or Giants :bigyikes:. :coolinoff:

Jon


#6

Kinda feel mixed on this one. Both sides should show a little more sensitivity. It is certainly a word that could be classified as a racial slur and that’s not cool. Then again, it’s also got a whole lot of organizational history tied to it. I totally get why they want to keep it, but it gives me the creeps that people so easily dismiss any concerns about its usage. I wonder how this crowd would feel if it the team name was, say, the Tuscaloosa N***ers.

Was there a century of genocide against the Dutch in the States? I mean, I understand that the British conquered New Amsterdam, but… :confused:


#7

How would you feel if the team had been named the Papists?


#8

It would be treated as if it was a Satanic conspiracy.


#9

I might actually be a fan of the team in that case. :smiley:


#10

This whole anti-Redskins is a relatively new phenomenon. Your example would never fly in the 1970s, '80s, or 1990s. In those decades I never heard anyone say anything about the Redskins name.

And I think we Americans are OVERLY-sensitive as it is. We don’t need MORE sensitivity…

I think this is pandering to a particular ethnic group who for the most part haven’t been overly critical of this. Where’s the outcry over the Cleveland Indians, Florida State Seminoles, Kansas City Chiefs, Atlanta Braves, or Chicago Blackhawks?

As a man of French-Canadian extraction; shall I demand that the Montreal Canadiens change THEIR name? Should the New York Yankees change THEIR name for fear of offending WASPs? Where does it end?


#11

Three Virginia Indian tribes not offended by Redskins:

washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-sports-bog/wp/2013/05/15/three-virginia-indian-tribes-not-offended-by-redskins/

Maybe they should rename themselves the Rappahannock… that name has a cool ring to it and it still begins with R.


#12

To say nothing of the extreme psychological damage my Irish 50% suffers whenever I’m subject to the hate speech explicit in the term “paddy wagon.”


#13

If there was ever a time to change the name it would have been 1940:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Championship_Game,_1940

Final score: Chicago Bears 73, Washington Redskins 0.


#14

=VeritasLuxMea;12096942]Kinda feel mixed on this one. Both sides should show a little more sensitivity.** It is certainly a word that could be classified as a racial slur and that’s not cool.** Then again, it’s also got a whole lot of organizational history tied to it. I totally get why they want to keep it, but it gives me the creeps that people so easily dismiss any concerns about its usage. I wonder how this crowd would feel if it the team name was, say, the Tuscaloosa N***ers.

Unless you have evidence of the bolded:

In 1999 the United States Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ordered
the cancellation of the trademarks of the Washington Redskins football
team after finding that the use of the word redskin was “scandalous” and
“may … disparage” Native Americans or “bring them into contempt, or disrepute.”
Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia reversed this decision on 30 September 2003, granting
summary judgment for Pro-Football, Inc., against Cheyenne-Creek
Indian activist Suzan Shown Harjo and others. The court found that “the
TTAB’s finding of disparagement is not supported by substantial evidence”

and that “the doctrine of laches precludes consideration of the
case.”1 One need not accept Harjo’s unfounded claim that the word redskin
“had its origins in the practice of presenting bloody red skins and scalps
as proof of Indian kill for bounty payments” 2 to accept that many find the
word objectionable in current use. But the actual origin of the word is entirely
benign and reflects more positive aspects of relations between Indians
and whites.

anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf

According to the court in 1999, what you state isn’t the case, and Goddard’s research seems to support the court’s ruling.

Was there a century of genocide against the Dutch in the States? I mean, I understand that the British conquered New Amsterdam, but… :confused:

The centuries (plural) of mistreatment of Native Americans is quite beside the point. The real question is at what point does the government, under the Constitution and Bill of Rights have the power to limit free speech in this way, even if the term is Redskin is offensive? It has none!!! And using a government agency as a device to skirt the 1st Amendment is nothing short of tyranny.

As for the Flying Dutchmen, you have made my point. The name is derived from the term “Pennsylvania Dutch”, as Annville is in central Pa. near Pennsylvania Dutch country. The fact is, however, that the Pennsylvania Dutch are not Dutch at all, but German. They were called “Dutch” by English speakers who mispronounced Deutsch [D oi tch].

Of course its silly. If LVC wants to have the nickname “Flying Dutchmen”, or Notre Dame the nickname "Fighting Irish (the Irish were persecuted here, BTW), and the NFL’s Washigton franchise wants the name Redskins, the government has no say in the matter, and using government agencies to bully them is, as I said , tyranny. Let the market forces determine what the name should be.

Jon


#15

I have nothing of depth to add to this discussion…just that your post made me laugh harder than I have thus far today…thanks!!!


#16

How about the term “jerry-rigged”, a slur against Germans!!!

Such hate speech!!

Jon


#17

I don’t get why people can trademark a dictionary word. A logo I can understand. But the actual word or combination of words?


#18

I just went to the team’s official store and bought stuff. It seemed the only appropriate response. :smiley:

–Jen


#19

If 90% of Catholics had no issue with it, based on polling, and it had been given to the original coach of the team as a term of endearment, I’d have no issue with it. Hence why i support the name Redskins.

Why is it some in this country, especially on the left, like to create controveries that are in essence made up. How long have the Skins been around? And suddenly, despite 90% of polled Native Americans not caring at all, because some Oneida tribe takes umbrage, the C police pile on and get people stirred up.

Seriously, get over it. The world is collapsing in many areas, and people are wasting energy on this? They need some new priorities.

If Snyder is smart, he’ll chance the official logo to a potato, trademark it as a reference to redskin potatoes, keep the name, then continue to sell merchandise with the old indian on it as they always do.

Again, why is Fighting Irish okay, as though all Irish and drunken brawlers, but people are bothered by this?


#20

I’m a Patriots fan and I’ll be showing my support by getting a Redskins t-shirt tonight! I think I’ll even patronize the team’s official store, too!


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.