What or who defines "disparaging"?
Is it a consensus? A panel? A vote from Congress? Or just a few uber sensitive people bitching and moaning? Becuase it seems it was deemed offensive by the latter. Keep in mind this is a slippery slope to go down.....
Statutes, along with court opinions that clarify anything that's not clear in the wording of the statute.
I'm not saying I agree with the decision...just pointing out that the USPTO does have the ability to cancel the trademark.
Their purpose is to basically trademark shit so people cannot steal from each other. The rest is way beyond the scope of their creation. Whether or not they CAN do it is beside the point.
It's your opinion that this is beyond the scope of what the USPTO
should be doing. And to some extent, I agree. But unless the Lanham Act is changed, it is within their authority.
Clinton started this "I'll do it till they tell me I cannot do it" BS. It's time for obummer to be dispatched.
The Redskins trademark was canceled back in 1999...when Bush was in office...and when the Republicans were the majority. It was appealed and reversed due to a procedural issue, but this is not something that just appeared under Clinton or Obama.
Aside from that, the law was created in 1946, so it's not a recent development by a younger generation.
78 Replies
10354 Views