Redskins Dealt Major Defeat In Battle Over Mascot
Source: TPM
A Virginia judge ordered Wednesday that the Washington Redskins trademark registrations be cancelled the biggest legal defeat the team has suffered in its two-decade battle over its name.
The ruling ends a legal saga that began when the team filed a lawsuit to contest the U.S. Patent and Trademark Offices decision to end the teams trademark registration, including the red-faced mascot viewed as racially offensive to Native Americans.
A trademark appeals board later affirmed the decision to end the teams registered holdings, saying the name is not legally protected because it is racially offensive, the Washington Post reported.
Jesse Witten, an attorney for the five Native Americans involved in the lawsuit against the team, called the ruling a watershed event and major victory in the Post. A appeal from the Redskins is likely, and the cancellation wont officially take effect until the end of the appeals process.
###
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/washington-redskins-mascot-trademarks-cancelled
snooper2
(30,151 posts)So, is Cracker Barrel Trademarked?
yellowcanine
(35,699 posts)What could possibly be wrong with the Cracker Barrel trademark?
Massacure
(7,525 posts)Cracker is a pejorative term for whites much as nigger is a pejorative term for blacks. Most people think of the food item when they hear the word cracker though, so they don't take offense to the name Cracker Barrel like they would as if a store tried to call itself Nigger Barrel for example.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)And many Cracker Barrel franchises reserved the right to refuse service to non-whites until sometime in the mid nineties.
Spare me.
mac56
(17,569 posts)"Cracker" is a term created by some white people to apply to other white people.
"Nigger" is a term created by white people to apply to black people.
There is no comparison here.
yellowcanine
(35,699 posts)And no, "cracker" does not carry the significance of the N word. Not even close. It is basically the equivalent of "redneck." Using either one is more rude and crude than racial.
Furthermore old country stores used to sell crackers from a barrel in bulk. So it is a real stretch to make it a pejorative. I hate when people take perfectly good words and make them have vulgar or pejorative meanings. OTOH, "Redskin" nearly from the beginning was a pejorative. Later it might have been used in a more benign way but the record is mixed at best.
romanic
(2,841 posts)but it's NOTHING like the word "nigger".
Raster
(20,998 posts)And sometimes Redskins are just... wait, no they're not.
randys1
(16,286 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)I just want them to change the logo!
just change the name to that of an Indian tribe.
yellowcanine
(35,699 posts)He is a meddlesome owner who seems to make all the wrong moves.
And on the name he is simply politically tone deaf.
randys1
(16,286 posts)Gothmog
(145,320 posts)Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)"Racism Dealt Another Defeat" is my headline.
-none
(1,884 posts)The federal government, which has Tomahawk cruise missiles and Apache, Blackhawk, Kiowa and Lakota helicopters, and used the code name "Geronimo" in the attack that killed Osama bin Laden, officially objects to the name of the Washington Redskins.
In my defense, I received this in an E-mail and am just re-posting it.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)-none
(1,884 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)I just received an email, so I take no responsibility for the idiotic statements I post!!
-none
(1,884 posts)I'm just sharing, that's all.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)"Tomahawk" is an actual item, Apache, Kiowa and Lakota are Native American tribes and Geronimo was an historical human being.
"Redskins" in a racial slur. Really, not that difficult.
Amishman
(5,557 posts)especially since the Seminole tribe supports FSU
swilton
(5,069 posts)Whoever is giving the Washington, DC 'team' PR advice is doing a poor job...They should get ahead of this and take ownership before they keep getting dragged further into the gutter.
In that regard, I suggest the new team name as the neocons - The DC Neocons -
romanic
(2,841 posts)Plus "Washington Tomahawks" has a better ring to it than the Redskins label to be honest.
yellowcanine
(35,699 posts)Auggie
(31,173 posts)FSogol
(45,488 posts)and only use Chief Wahoo on their home gear. They are attempting to get rid of him without upsetting their fans. Bad move, imo. Sometimes it is just better to rip the band aid off rather than slowly pull it away. Get rid of him and take your lumps, Cleveland.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)Darb
(2,807 posts)opposing fans should stay away from Redskin games when they visit their teams stadiums. The fellow owners would force a change pronto.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Snyder is going to laugh all the way to the bank. Tons of people will "need" new merchandise.
NCjack
(10,279 posts)anyone can manufacture the "redskin" items and pay Greedy Dan $nothing. That could result in 50% below Greedy Dan's selling price for his yet unannounced outrageously priced branded items. Getting the fans to switch to a new logo may require drastic action, such as relocating the team to stadium beyond a convenient travel distance for the current fan base. Regardless, I think he is in for a fight with his team's fan base.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)I think Snyder will really have to do something to ensure his profits. A new team name and mascot, legally protected, will make him a lot of money. I know that it has to change, it is offensive- I just hate that he is going to make big on the deal.
NCjack
(10,279 posts)to make huge profits, even if he has create a problem and charge the team fans fee for the solution. The team's fan base are chumps.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)I like football (lifelong Steelers fan) but I don't buy paraphernalia.
smiley
(1,432 posts)so that the fan base gobbles up as much Redskins memorabilia before he is forced to change the name and team identity.
onenote
(42,714 posts)It did not revoke the team's trademark. It revoked its registration. The decision specifically points out the difference, noting that a court cannot revoke a trademark, and that "unregistered" trademarks are entitled to protection under common law, many state laws, and even, albeit to a lesser extent than registered trademarks, under federal law. The team can continue to put "" next to its trademark. And given that it has much deeper pockets than the folks who it would be suing, it still can go after those who use its trademark without the team's consent.
NCjack
(10,279 posts)eringer
(460 posts)And, perhaps, they could "share" the name of the DC Rugby team (Renegades).
With that problem solved, they only have one major problem left ... fielding a competitive team!
Many minor problems that have no easy fixes persist -- ownership, attendance (there are more fans for the opposing team at the games); bringing peanuts in the shell back to the stadium; getting a decent stadium (FedEx is awful!!!).