• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Patent office cancels Redskins trademarks

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This is just now being announced, so there isn't much out there yet:

The U.S. Patent Office has canceled trademarks belonging to the Redskins football team, saying they are offensive to Native Americans.

In a decision released Wednesday, the office's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruled that the "that these registrations must be canceled because they were disparaging to Native Americans."

The board also said it lacked the authority to prevent the team from continuing to use the trademarks. .

The decision came in response to a suit brought by what the board called "five Native Americans."
 
They just need to rename the team the Washington Lobbyists.

I do find it kind of hard to believe their trademark is being cancelled.
 
OMG. This should be an Onion article. Absolutely unbelievable.

I feel that the US government just got itself a HUGE civil lawsuit from the owners of the Washington Redskins. I'm not a patent attorney, but I feel sure that 'not hurting someone's feelings' aren't mentioned in the requirements for a trademark.
 
So then... it would appear that the power of government is being brought to bear now? The power of persuasion is apparently not enough so now it's time to use the persuasion of power?

So many slippery slopes, so little time...
 
I feel that the US government just got itself a HUGE civil lawsuit from the owners of the Washington Redskins. I'm not a patent attorney, but I feel sure that 'not hurting someone's feelings' aren't mentioned in the requirements for a trademark.

Didn't the article state that the patent office had no power to prevent the redskins from continuing to use their name.
 
Wait, let me get this right… so the government, which has pushed the team to change it's name, has unilaterally decided the team name is 'bad', so it unilaterally acted and voided their trademark? And the same government agency did this previously, and the courts reversed them? So they wasted tax payer money in the courts, were shown they were wrong by the courts, and are now going to waste more tax payer money in the courts (because it will again go to the courts)? Do they think if they just keep doing it eventually they will get a judge that agree's with them?
 
Didn't the article state that the patent office had no power to prevent the redskins from continuing to use their name.

The point is, if they say the trademark is invalid, ANYONE can print up redskins stuff and sell it.
 
The point is, if they say the trademark is invalid, ANYONE can print up redskins stuff and sell it.

I would have thought that was obvious to everyone who understands what a trademark patent is. Maybe I was wrong.

I hope Dan Snyder sues the **** out of someone for this.
 
Didn't the article state that the patent office had no power to prevent the redskins from continuing to use their name.

Yes. I think one of the effects will be that all of their trademarked products will be fair game.
 
Didn't the article state that the patent office had no power to prevent the redskins from continuing to use their name.

Anyone can use any name that isn't protected by trademark. What this is, is an attack on the ability of the team owners to protect their brand and make money from that brand. It was the government saying that the name of the company was "offensive." How many other companies are next?

Should the federal government have the power to harm a private company that is not breaking any laws? Because that's exactly what they just did.
 
The point is, if they say the trademark is invalid, ANYONE can print up redskins stuff and sell it.

Pretty much do anyway. I have two #44 Riggins jerseys. One is a real deal NFL one and the other is a knock off. Very hard to tell the difference.
 
Yes. I think one of the effects will be that all of their trademarked products will be fair game.
This is exactly correct. They have been talking about this on ESPN radio and the merchandizing losses here will be huge.

It really begs the question of how incompetent... maybe that's not the correct term... how ARROGANT are the people who decide these things? Don't they realize that they will be sued and they are dead ducks in the courtroom?

Mind boggling.
 
Pretty much do anyway. I have two #44 Riggins jerseys. One is a real deal NFL one and the other is a knock off. Very hard to tell the difference.

It's really irrelevant if people already break the law WRT trademarks.
 
Yes. I think one of the effects will be that all of their trademarked products will be fair game.

Which was a direct attack by the federal government on the ability of this company to make money, just because they don't like the name, but broke no laws.

Who's next?

Coke, which is named after a drug, but isn't a violation of law?

Walmart, because they don't like how much they pay their employees, even though they're not breaking any laws?

Slippery slopes are dangerous to traverse.
 
I would have thought that was obvious to everyone who understands what a trademark patent is. Maybe I was wrong.

I hope Dan Snyder sues the **** out of someone for this.

That would require bringing a lawsuit againist the 5 native Americans who brought the suit to the patent office.
 
Which was direct attack by the federal government on the ability of this company to make money, just because they don't like the name, but broke no laws.

Who's next?

Coke, which is named after a drug, but isn't a violation of law?

Walmart, because they don't like how much they pay their employees, even though they're not breaking any laws?

Slippery slopes are dangerous to traverse.

There is a beer available called "Easy Blonde". As a blonde, it offends me. I think I'll call the patent office and tell them that my feelings are hurt.
 
That would require bringing a lawsuit againist the 5 native Americans who brought the suit to the patent office.

Why? The US Patent Office took the action which harms the team, not the Native Americans. The lawsuit will be against the US Government, as it should be.
 
That would require bringing a lawsuit againist the 5 native Americans who brought the suit to the patent office.
I don't believe this is correct since it is the patent office that made the decision and not the 5 Native Americans.
 
Which was a direct attack by the federal government on the ability of this company to make money, just because they don't like the name, but broke no laws.

Who's next?

Coke, which is named after a drug, but isn't a violation of law?

Walmart, because they don't like how much they pay their employees, even though they're not breaking any laws?

Slippery slopes are dangerous to traverse.

What about the 5 Native Americans who brought the original suit? Should they have just remained silent?
 
This is exactly correct. They have been talking about this on ESPN radio and the merchandizing losses here will be huge.

It really begs the question of how incompetent... maybe that's not the correct term... how ARROGANT are the people who decide these things? Don't they realize that they will be sued and they are dead ducks in the courtroom?

Mind boggling.

Do you really think "the government" cares if they win or lose? They work with unlimited funds. They don't give a damn. They'll spend the team broke. And spend US broke in the process. And if the team wins punitive damages? We'll lose again. This is jack-boot control of private enterprise. It is scary.
 
Back
Top Bottom