Football Federal Judge Orders Cancellation of Redskins' Trademark Registrations

RunKC · 07-08-2015, 10:47 AM

Federal judge orders cancellation of Redskins’ trademark registrations
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Plus Share via Email More Options

Resize Text Print Article Comments 395
Who is open to changing the Redskins’ name?
View Photos PHOTOS | More and more people are saying the NFL franchise for Washington should change its name. Here are a few of them.
By Ian Shapira July 8 at 9:43 AM
The Washington Redskins lost their biggest legal and public relations battle yet in the war over their name after a federal judge in Northern Virginia on Wednesday ordered the cancellation of the NFL team’s federal trademark registrations, which have been opposed for decades by many Native Americans who feel the moniker disparages their race.

The cancellation doesn’t go into effect until the Redskins have exhausted the appeals process in the federal court system. But even if the Redskins ultimately take the case to the Supreme Court and lose, the team can still use “Redskins” and seek trademark protections under state law. The team has argued, however, that a cancellation of its trademarks could taint its brand and remove legal benefits that would protect against copycat entrepreneurs.

U.S. District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee’s decision affirmed an earlier ruling by the federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Last year, the appeal board declared in a 2-to-1 vote that the team’s moniker is offensive to Native Americans and therefore ineligible under the Lanham Act for status in the federal trademark registry. The appeal board had been petitioned by five Native American activists, including Amanda Blackhorse, a Navajo Nation member from Arizona who is well known for leading protests against the team outside stadiums wherever it plays.

[U.S. patent office cancels Redskins trademark registrations, saying name is disparaging to Native Americans]

The Redskins tried to overturn the appeal board’s ruling in August by suing Blackhorse and the four other Native American activists in federal court in Alexandria, Va. The team argued that the Lanham Act conflicted with its First Amendment rights. It also contended that Blackhorse didn’t prove that enough Native Americans opposed the name at the time the team registered its trademarks in 1967, 1974, 1978 and 1990.

VIEW GRAPHIC
Where notable people stand on the Redskins’ name
A Washington Redskins spokesman said the team is reviewing the decision and considering its legal options.

Jesse Witten, one of the attorneys for the Native Americans, celebrated the judge’s ruling.

“This is a huge victory. Getting this ruling from a U.S. District judge is a watershed event,” Witten said, adding that he doesn’t expect the war to be over anytime soon. “The team has been fighting this case so hard and leaving no stone unturned and scorching every square inch of earth that it’s hard to imagine they will not appeal.”

The Redskins have been waging a legal war to defend their federal trademark registrations for more than two decades. The fight began in 1992, when a group of Native Americans led by Suzan Shown Harjo filed a petition with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to strip the team’s name of its registrations. Seven years later, the panel ruled in Harjo’s favor.

But the Redskins appealed in federal court, winning on the grounds that Harjo and the other Native Americans didn’t produce enough evidence showing the name was insulting and that they waited too long after turning 18 years old — legally adults — to claim the name is offensive.

Before that case was lost, Blackhorse and four other young Native Americans from Florida, Utah and Oklahoma had filed their own petition with the trademark appeal board in August 2006.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...d55_story.html

Graystoke · 07-08-2015, 10:54 AM

I would make a cake for the Redskins if they ask me

kcpasco · 07-08-2015, 10:55 AM

Since the federal government is going the route of censorship and banning what it deems offensive. I got a whole list of shit I wanna throw on top of this steamy pile.

ToxSocks · 07-08-2015, 11:05 AM

I wonder if black people are offended by the name "blackfoot" indians. They should sue the tribe for such an offensive name.

cosmo20002 · 07-08-2015, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcpasco

Since the federal government is going the route of censorship and banning what it deems offensive. I got a whole list of shit I wanna throw on top of this steamy pile.

Nothing was censored or banned. Did you even TRY reading the article?

kcpasco · 07-08-2015, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Nothing was censored or banned. Did you even TRY reading the article?

So the end game isn't to try and force a name change?

cosmo20002 · 07-08-2015, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcpasco

So the end game isn't to try and force a name change?

You said "the federal government is going the route of censorship and banning what it deems offensive." Maybe you don't know what some of those words mean.

Skyy God · 07-08-2015, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcpasco

So the end game isn't to try and force a name change?

Maybe, but they're just following the law. Trademark law "expressly prohibits registration of disparaging terms".

Eleazar · 07-08-2015, 01:19 PM

I don't believe the Redskins name is necessarily disparaging. They seem to treat the imagined subjects of their nickname with respect.

ForeverChiefs58 · 07-08-2015, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cochise

I don't believe the Redskins name is necessarily disparaging. They seem to treat the imagined subjects of their nickname with respect.

Why is it they don't find the name Oklahoma offensive or disparaging?

Maybe because these terms were made up and used by the Indians as a way to identify each other to ****ing begin with

baitism · 07-08-2015, 03:03 PM

I need to get a Redskins jersey with a Confederate flag embroidered on the back for maximum trolling.

threebag · 07-08-2015, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing

I wonder if black people are offended by the name "blackfoot" indians. They should sue the tribe for such an offensive name.

Al and Jessie is on the way

**Dave Lane** · 07-08-2015, 08:49 PM

Its a name that is at least mildly offensive. I'm in the Carlin bandwagon of its just a word, but I understand why Indians wouldn't like it.

**007** · 07-09-2015, 03:30 AM

I agree with Facebook that they should drop Washington from their name because it offends me.

**ShortRoundChief** · 07-09-2015, 04:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

Its a name that is at least mildly offensive. I'm in the Carlin bandwagon of its just a word, but I understand why Indians wouldn't like it.

I suggest they change their name to the Washington Whooping Cranes.

07-08-2015, 10:47 AM
RunKC Andy Reid Supporter Join Date: Apr 2012 Casino cash: $-1520389	Federal Judge Orders Cancellation of Redskins' Trademark Registrations Federal judge orders cancellation of Redskins’ trademark registrations Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Plus Share via Email More Options Resize Text Print Article Comments 395 Who is open to changing the Redskins’ name? View Photos PHOTOS \| More and more people are saying the NFL franchise for Washington should change its name. Here are a few of them. By Ian Shapira July 8 at 9:43 AM The Washington Redskins lost their biggest legal and public relations battle yet in the war over their name after a federal judge in Northern Virginia on Wednesday ordered the cancellation of the NFL team’s federal trademark registrations, which have been opposed for decades by many Native Americans who feel the moniker disparages their race. The cancellation doesn’t go into effect until the Redskins have exhausted the appeals process in the federal court system. But even if the Redskins ultimately take the case to the Supreme Court and lose, the team can still use “Redskins” and seek trademark protections under state law. The team has argued, however, that a cancellation of its trademarks could taint its brand and remove legal benefits that would protect against copycat entrepreneurs. U.S. District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee’s decision affirmed an earlier ruling by the federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Last year, the appeal board declared in a 2-to-1 vote that the team’s moniker is offensive to Native Americans and therefore ineligible under the Lanham Act for status in the federal trademark registry. The appeal board had been petitioned by five Native American activists, including Amanda Blackhorse, a Navajo Nation member from Arizona who is well known for leading protests against the team outside stadiums wherever it plays. [U.S. patent office cancels Redskins trademark registrations, saying name is disparaging to Native Americans] The Redskins tried to overturn the appeal board’s ruling in August by suing Blackhorse and the four other Native American activists in federal court in Alexandria, Va. The team argued that the Lanham Act conflicted with its First Amendment rights. It also contended that Blackhorse didn’t prove that enough Native Americans opposed the name at the time the team registered its trademarks in 1967, 1974, 1978 and 1990. VIEW GRAPHIC Where notable people stand on the Redskins’ name A Washington Redskins spokesman said the team is reviewing the decision and considering its legal options. Jesse Witten, one of the attorneys for the Native Americans, celebrated the judge’s ruling. “This is a huge victory. Getting this ruling from a U.S. District judge is a watershed event,” Witten said, adding that he doesn’t expect the war to be over anytime soon. “The team has been fighting this case so hard and leaving no stone unturned and scorching every square inch of earth that it’s hard to imagine they will not appeal.” The Redskins have been waging a legal war to defend their federal trademark registrations for more than two decades. The fight began in 1992, when a group of Native Americans led by Suzan Shown Harjo filed a petition with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to strip the team’s name of its registrations. Seven years later, the panel ruled in Harjo’s favor. But the Redskins appealed in federal court, winning on the grounds that Harjo and the other Native Americans didn’t produce enough evidence showing the name was insulting and that they waited too long after turning 18 years old — legally adults — to claim the name is offensive. Before that case was lost, Blackhorse and four other young Native Americans from Florida, Utah and Oklahoma had filed their own petition with the trademark appeal board in August 2006. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...d55_story.html
Posts: 52,132

07-08-2015, 10:54 AM	#2
Graystoke MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Driftless Region Casino cash: $-2500000	I would make a cake for the Redskins if they ask me
Posts: 9,609

07-08-2015, 10:55 AM	#3
kcpasco MVP Join Date: Sep 2007 Casino cash: $6143463	Since the federal government is going the route of censorship and banning what it deems offensive. I got a whole list of shit I wanna throw on top of this steamy pile.
Posts: 15,945

07-08-2015, 11:05 AM	#4
ToxSocks Needs more middle fingers Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: San Diego Casino cash: $2083063	I wonder if black people are offended by the name "blackfoot" indians. They should sue the tribe for such an offensive name. __________________ Life is like a dick. Sometimes it gets hard for no reason, but it can't stay hard forever.
Posts: 65,925

07-08-2015, 01:19 PM	#9
Eleazar Beyond the Rapids Join Date: May 2003 Location: Langley, VA Casino cash: $-370000	I don't believe the Redskins name is necessarily disparaging. They seem to treat the imagined subjects of their nickname with respect.
Posts: 80,659

07-08-2015, 03:03 PM	#11
baitism Starter Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Overland Park, KS Casino cash: $3599551	I need to get a Redskins jersey with a Confederate flag embroidered on the back for maximum trolling.
Posts: 273

07-08-2015, 08:49 PM	#13
Dave Lane Space Cadet and Aczabel Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Kanab, UT, USA Casino cash: $9333275 VARSITY	Its a name that is at least mildly offensive. I'm in the Carlin bandwagon of its just a word, but I understand why Indians wouldn't like it. __________________ Thanks, Trump for the civics lesson. We are learning so much about RICO, espionage, sedition, impeachment, the 25th Amendment, order of succession, nepotism, separation of powers, 1st Amendment, obstruction of justice, the emoluments clause, conflicts of interest, collusion, sanctions, oligarchs, money laundering and so much more.
Posts: 40,584

07-09-2015, 03:30 AM	#14
007 Shaken. Not stirred. Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Casino cash: $12210126 VARSITY	I agree with Facebook that they should drop Washington from their name because it offends me. __________________ My dear girl, there are some things that just aren’t done. Such as, drinking Dom Perignon ’53 above the temperature of 38 degrees Fahrenheit. That’s just as bad as listening to the Beatles without earmuffs.
Posts: 65,734