Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: Townhallsavoy on June 18, 2014, 11:27:59 AM
-
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has canceled six federal trademark registrations for the name of the Washington Redskins, ruling that the name is “disparaging to Native Americans†and thus cannot be trademarked under federal law that prohibits the protection of offensive or disparaging language.
The U.S. PTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board issued a ruling in the case, brought against the team by plaintiff Amanda Blackhorse, Wednesday morning.
“We decide, based on the evidence properly before us, that these registrations must be cancelled because they were disparaging to Native Americans at the respective times they were registered,†the board wrote in its opinion, “>which is here.
“The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board agreed with our clients that the team’s name and trademarks disparage Native Americans. The Board ruled that the Trademark Office should never have registered these trademarks in the first place,†Jesse Witten, the plaintiffs’ lead attorney, said in a press release. “We presented a wide variety of evidence – including dictionary definitions and other reference works, newspaper clippings, movie clips, scholarly articles, expert linguist testimony, and evidence of the historic opposition by Native American groups – to demonstrate that the word ‘redskin’ is an ethnic slur.â€
“I am extremely happy that the [Board] ruled in our favor,†Blackhorse said in a statement. “It is a great victory for Native Americans and for all Americans. We filed our petition eight years ago and it has been a tough battle ever since. I hope this ruling brings us a step closer to that inevitable day when the name of the Washington football team will be changed. The team’s name is racist and derogatory. I’ve said it before and I will say it again – if people wouldn’t dare call a Native American a ‘redskin’ because they know it is offensive, how can an NFL football team have this name?â€
The Trial and Appeals Board rescinded the team’s trademark protections in a 1999 ruling that was part of a case filed in 1992. A federal court later overturned the ruling on appeal due to a technicality that the plaintiffs say has been fixed in this most recent case.
The team will almost certainly appeal the case, and it will be able to keep its trademark protection during appeal. Losing the trademark would not force the team to change its name, but it would allow anyone who wanted to use “Redskins†on merchandise or through other means to do so, which could cost the team — and, because of the NFL’s revenue-sharing model, other NFL teams — “every imaginable loss you can think of,†as the team’s lawyers argued in the original case. For that reason, the trademark has long been thought of by opponents of the team’s name as the easiest avenue to changing it.
http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2014/06/18/3450333/in-landmark-decision-us-patent-office-cancels-trademark-for-redskins-football-team/ (http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2014/06/18/3450333/in-landmark-decision-us-patent-office-cancels-trademark-for-redskins-football-team/)
-
Isn't this a bit overstepping the bounds of their purpose?
-
:facepalm:
-
New Orleans Saints - The Catholic church and other religious entities which include the concept of a saint in their doctrine are offended that an NFL team would consider their holy label as a mascot for a brutal, greedy sport.
Atlanta Braves - Native American tomahawk chop? Don't think so.
Florida St Seminoles - See Redskins and Braves.
Auburn, LSU, Detroit, Missouri, Memphis Tigers - Tigers are on the endangered species list and using the tiger as a mascot invokes a negative depiction of the animal which will lead to poachers and wrongfully fearful people killing massive amounts of protected tigers.
Alabama Crimson Tide - Disparaging against women's menstrual cycle.
South Carolina Gamecocks - Cock fighting is illegal and the use of this mascot inspires gamblers to use the innocent animal in competitive, brutal, murderous sports.
New York Knicks - Sounds like an abbreviation of the "n" word.
Syracuse Orange - It's just a fucking color. That's unacceptable and disparaging to all rational thought.
Stanford Cardinal - See Syracuse. Add an 's'. Use bird.
Chicago White Sox - Why not black sox? Rainbow sox? Racial Equality Sox?
-
I wonder if they plan on looking at : FUBU
-
Thank goodness they have gotten this important shit taken care of so they can coast a bit now and take care of the easy shit like Benghazi and Iraq.
-
Elections have consequences
-
Isn't this a bit overstepping the bounds of their purpose?
The United States Patent and Trademark Office overstepped its bounds by canceling a trademark?
I think it's a silly decision to have made, but it's within their authority to do so.
-
The United States Patent and Trademark Office overstepped its bounds by canceling a trademark?
I think it's a silly decision to have made, but it's within their authority to do so.
Purpose. RIF
-
Thank goodness they have gotten this important shit taken care of so they can coast a bit now and take care of the easy shit like Benghazi, bama's Houndstooth and Iraq.
Fixt
-
Purpose. RIF
Federal law allows them to cancel a trademark that is offensive or disparaging, and there is a process by which people can ask the USPTO to do just that. So yes, canceling trademarks that don't comply with federal laws is part of their purpose.
-
Federal law allows them to cancel a trademark that is offensive or disparaging, and there is a process by which people can ask the USPTO to do just that. So yes, canceling trademarks that don't comply with federal laws is part of their purpose.
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.....
-
Federal law allows them to cancel a trademark that is offensive or disparaging, and there is a process by which people can ask the USPTO to do just that. So yes, canceling trademarks that don't comply with federal laws is part of their purpose.
So they are canceling what they once approved?
I know different times and political correctness and shit.
-
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.
Clinton started this "I'll do it till they tell me I cannot do it" BS. It's time for obummer to be dispatched.
Big brother will take care of you....
We used to be a country of people. Now we are a country of laws. Revolution is coming.
-
So they are canceling what they once approved?
I know different times and political correctness and shit.
Thats some of my point. They didn't find it offensive when approved, and every year since they approved it. They didn't cancel it in 1978, 1986, 1997 or any other year. A few people raised a fuss about it and now its cancelled.
I think it sends a bad bad message that anything can be considered offensive as long as someone deems it so - even if they are not sincere about it and are being total douchebags. There has to be a certain degree of common sense involved in these discussions and I dont see any at all.
-
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.....
Especially since most of the Indians, don't give a fuck about it.
-
Well what this really does is bring to light what the new name will be? Since it should be truthful and topical for the time I have a few ideas...
The Washington Casinos
The Washington Firewaters
The Washington Peyote Users
Feel free to chime in.
-
Washington Fleecers
Washington Bullets...wait, no.
Washington Wallet Watchers
-
Well what this really does is bring to light what the new name will be? Since it should be truthful and topical for the time I have a few ideas...
The Washington Casinos
The Washington Firewaters
The Washington Peyote Users
Feel free to chime in.
Crooks....Liars.....Felons.....
Iffin were being accurate here.
-
Revolution is coming.
I don't think you are wrong and honestly it scares the shit out of me.
-
Washington Blackskins?
-
Washington Redtapes
-
Washington Red Dot Indians
-
Washington Palefaces
-
Washington Foreskins
-
I don't think you are wrong and honestly it scares the shit out of me.
Many educated people poo-poo this idea, but I know a lot of folks who are fed up. And they are from all walks of life. They are also stocking up.
This crap with the Redskins is just another in a long line of big government controlling the meaningless shit.
It will escalate. People laugh when you bring up Hitler(they cite the silly ass godwins law).
But history has proven that it started somewhere, and in that day and time, it started similarly. The liberals are a patient lot. They are waiting for the last of the the Korea/Viet Nam folks to die off. That was last generation to be educated from a conservative standpoint. Then they think there will not be enough of us left to disagree with them. That time is coming soon.
-
Washington Foreskins
Football or politicians?
-
Washington Benghazi Jihad
-
Washington Hillary's
-
Washington Skins? That should cover just about everybody.
-
Washington Douceskins.
-
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-f-athUNxUf4/Tl6p1cYG1yI/AAAAAAAAS7U/l5qzAbye72k/s320/toughskins.jpg)
-
Washington Skins? That should cover just about everybody.
and offends everyone...and I demand you apologize at once!
-
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-f-athUNxUf4/Tl6p1cYG1yI/AAAAAAAAS7U/l5qzAbye72k/s320/toughskins.jpg)
I had these in green. Was called Mr. Green Jeans by the bullies at school until one day I had enough and beat their ass. I've whipped a many a man's ass ever since that day.
-
I had these in green. Was called Mr. Green Jeans by the bullies at school until one day I had enough and beat their ass. I've whipped a many a man's ass ever since that day.
Well how big of a boy are ya?
-
Well how big of a boy are ya?
Are you the feller that sells bird dogs?
-
Well how big of a boy are ya?
I'm fixin to pack a lunch
-
I'm fixin to pack a lunch
I'm gonna tear you a new corn chute.
-
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.
-
Black Bears
-
I had these in green. Was called Mr. Green Jeans by the bullies at school until one day I had enough and beat their ass. I've whipped a many a man's ass ever since that day.
Toughskins. God.
I had the turquoise blue pair and the doo-doo brown ones too. One of the happiest days of my elementary school life was when I saved up enough money to buy my own pair of pants so I could escape the humiliation of the Toughskins.
But of course I bought another pair of Toughskins. My money, but parents still controlled what I could and couldn't buy. The only place I was allowed to shop was Sears. Forget that I wanted badly to go to Martins instead where the super cool, uber keen big flares with the slit butt pockets were on display. No, Sears was it. So I got Toughskins again. At least I was able to get a chic plaid pair.
(http://scenteddemented.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/75searscatalog/toughskins1.JPG)
The outfits on those two kids reflect pretty much exactly how I dressed when I wanted to impress the ladies of the fourth grade.
-
Toughskins. God.
I had the turquoise blue pair and the doo-doo brown ones too. One of the happiest days of my elementary school life was when I saved up enough money to buy my own pair of pants so I could escape the humiliation of the Toughskins.
But of course I bought another pair of Toughskins. My money, but parents still controlled what I could and couldn't buy. The only place I was allowed to shop was Sears. Forget that I wanted badly to go to Martins instead where the super cool, uber keen big flares with the slit butt pockets were on display. No, Sears was it. So I got Toughskins again. At least I was able to get a chic plaid pair.
(http://scenteddemented.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/75searscatalog/toughskins1.JPG)
The outfits on those two kids reflect pretty much exactly how I dressed when I wanted to impress the ladies of the fourth grade.
Thank God I didn't have to wear the sweater vest. So, that's what happened to scar you for life.
-
Thank God I didn't have to wear the sweater vest. So, that's what happened to scar you for life.
The girls pelted him with tomatoes.
-
The girls pelted him with tomatoes.
Was gettin laid in the sixth grade. And I WANTED to wear the vest. I rocked the vest.
-
Was gettin laid in the sixth grade. And I WANTED to wear the vest. I rocked the vest.
I think we have established your dog doesn't count.
-
So does this mean I can print shirts with Redskins on them and sell them without paying royalties?
-
So does this mean I can print shirts with Redskins on them and sell them without paying royalties?
Only to kids wearing toughskins that are in the 6th grade.
-
So does this mean I can print shirts with Redskins on them and sell them without paying royalties?
Very good question...
-
Very good question...
Yes. It does. That's exactly the purpose. Doesn't mean they'll switch names, but it is incentive since they'll be losing tons of merchandising money.
It's fucking stupid because this is 100% whitey whitesplaining to Native Americans that they should be offended, even if they aren't.
Granted this was a decade ago, but it's the most recent data we have, and it's not like it was 60 years ago.
http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/most-indians-say-name-of-washington-redskins-is-acceptable-while-9-percent-call-it-offensive/ (http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/most-indians-say-name-of-washington-redskins-is-acceptable-while-9-percent-call-it-offensive/)
Most Indians Say Name of Washington “Redskins†Is Acceptable While 9 Percent Call It Offensive
Friday, September 24th, 2004
Most American Indians say that calling Washington’s professional football team the “Redskins†does not bother them, the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey shows.
Ninety percent of Indians took that position, while 9 percent said they found the name “offensive.†One percent had no answer. The margin of sampling error for those findings was plus or minus two percentage points.
Because they make up a very small proportion of the total population, the responses of 768 people who said they were Indians or Native Americans were collected over a very long period of polling, from October 7, 2003 through September 20, 2004. They included Indians from every state except Alaska and Hawaii, where the Annenberg survey does not interview. The question that was put to them was “The professional football team in Washington calls itself the Washington Redskins. As a Native American, do you find that name offensive or doesn’t it bother you?â€
If the poll results were reversed, or even 51% of Native Americans were offended by the name, then change it yesterday.
Until then, this is whitey's white guilt and nothing more. To me, there's not much that's more racist than taking offense on behalf of an entire race of which you aren't even a member. Because their undeveloped inferior brains can't properly process why they should take offense in the way that our advanced white brains can, apparently according to these assholes.
-
Yes. It does. That's exactly the purpose. Doesn't mean they'll switch names, but it is incentive since they'll be losing tons of merchandising money.
It's fudgeing stupid because this is 100% whitey whitesplaining to Native Americans that they should be offended, even if they aren't.
Granted this was a decade ago, but it's the most recent data we have, and it's not like it was 60 years ago.
http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/most-indians-say-name-of-washington-redskins-is-acceptable-while-9-percent-call-it-offensive/ (http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/most-indians-say-name-of-washington-redskins-is-acceptable-while-9-percent-call-it-offensive/)If the poll results were reversed, or even 51% of Native Americans were offended by the name, then change it yesterday.
Until then, this is whitey's white guilt and nothing more. To me, there's not much that's more racist than taking offense on behalf of an entire race of which you aren't even a member. Because their undeveloped inferior brains can't properly process why they should take offense in the way that our advanced white brains can, apparently according to these assholes.
It is amazing to me how insensitive people can be toward the injuns.
-
Yes. It does. That's exactly the purpose. Doesn't mean they'll switch names, but it is incentive since they'll be losing tons of merchandising money.
It's fucking stupid because this is 100% whitey whitesplaining to Native Americans that they should be offended, even if they aren't.
Granted this was a decade ago, but it's the most recent data we have, and it's not like it was 60 years ago.
http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/most-indians-say-name-of-washington-redskins-is-acceptable-while-9-percent-call-it-offensive/ (http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/most-indians-say-name-of-washington-redskins-is-acceptable-while-9-percent-call-it-offensive/)If the poll results were reversed, or even 51% of Native Americans were offended by the name, then change it yesterday.
Until then, this is whitey's white guilt and nothing more. To me, there's not much that's more racist than taking offense on behalf of an entire race of which you aren't even a member. Because their undeveloped inferior brains can't properly process why they should take offense in the way that our advanced white brains can, apparently according to these assholes.
(http://www.ski-epic.com/gifs/g007_citizen_kane_slow_clap.gif)
-
So does this mean I can print shirts with Redskins on them and sell them without paying royalties?
Not until they exhaust all of their appeals. They still have the trademark at the moment.
-
Until then, this is whitey's white guilt and nothing more. To me, there's not much that's more racist than taking offense on behalf of an entire race of which you aren't even a member. Because their undeveloped inferior brains can't properly process why they should take offense in the way that our advanced white brains can, apparently according to these assholes.
The disparagement claim was brought by a group of Native Americans. I assume the decision was either made by an all white or primarily white panel, but no white people brought the claim on behalf of Native Americans. You need standing to bring suit, which means you have to be the allegedly injured party.
-
What does all this have to do with jeans made of a high density fiber strong enough to make trampolines?
-
To me, there's not much that's more racist than taking offense on behalf of an entire race of which you aren't even a member.
What do you mean, "you people"?
-
The disparagement claim was brought by a group of Native Americans. I assume the decision was either made by an all white or primarily white panel, but no white people brought the claim on behalf of Native Americans. You need standing to bring suit, which means you have to be the allegedly injured party.
Link?
This all came about from Bob Costas and then all the Twitter hipsters following suit.
Never saw any official "disparagement claim" from any Native Americans, but I do know that less than 10% of a group that makes up less than 1% of the population gives a fuck.
-
Link?
This all came about from Bob Costas and then all the Twitter hipsters following suit.
Never saw any official "disparagement claim" from any Native Americans, but I do know that less than 10% of a group that makes up less than 1% of the population gives a fuck.
Oh shit, he's doing math again.
-
Link?
This all came about from Bob Costas and then all the Twitter hipsters following suit.
Never saw any official "disparagement claim" from any Native Americans, but I do know that less than 10% of a group that makes up less than 1% of the population gives a fudge.
From the original article posted:
The U.S. PTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board issued a ruling in the case, brought against the team by plaintiff Amanda Blackhorse, Wednesday morning.
Blackhorse sounds Jewish to me, you're probably right.
Or were you looking for a link to US civil procedure Vandy was referring to?
-
From the original article posted:
The U.S. PTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board issued a ruling in the case, brought against the team by plaintiff Amanda Blackhorse, Wednesday morning.
Blackhorse sounds Jewish to me, you're probably right.
Or were you looking for a link to US civil procedure Vandy was referring to?
Tonto Goldstein?
-
Tonto Goldstein?
He puts on a big show in court. Always wears his ceremonial headdress and yamaka.
-
From the original article posted:
The U.S. PTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board issued a ruling in the case, brought against the team by plaintiff Amanda Blackhorse, Wednesday morning.
Blackhorse sounds Jewish to me, you're probably right.
Or were you looking for a link to US civil procedure Vandy was referring to?
(http://michaelgraham.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/emily-litella.jpg)
Admittedly, I breezed over the OP because I'd already read 25 other articles concerning this that all didn't mention Ms. Blackhorse.
I also am just now learning that earlier this month a new study was released.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/06/04/67-percent-native-americans-say-redskins-offensive-155143 (http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/06/04/67-percent-native-americans-say-redskins-offensive-155143)
Supposedly, according to this poll that was conducted by the Director of Center for Indigenous Peoples, 67% of Native Americans are actually offended.
If that's actually the case, then I reverse my opinion on the matter, and if people want to change it, fine.
The 2004 poll supposedly was criticized for its accuracy by not verifying that the respondents were actually Native American. I suppose it's also possible that this 2014 poll is cherry picking its respondents.
I only had a strong opinion about this when the data showed that Native Americans didn't and this appeared to be 100% the product of white guilt. This no longer seems to be the case, so I no longer am of that strong opinion.
-
We haven't cared what the indians think in over 150 years. Why start now?
For every letter of the name we change, they have to give up a casino.
-
+2 for that picture
-
Also seeing that the 2014 poll only consisted of 98 Native Americans.
I'm not entirely sure that it's exactly possible to have a representative sample from that. Still, it's a decade more recent.
-
We haven't cared what the indians think in over 150 years. Why start now?
For every letter of the name we change, they have to give up a casino.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ErIHFtEZHhA/UB5ojUXSNaI/AAAAAAAACGU/eA0wS0AhEyA/s1600/crying-indian.gif)
-
No one ever speaks out against the discrimination against big-dicked fellows. It's not always shits and giggles for us either.
-
No one ever speaks out against the discrimination against big-dicked fellows. It's not always shits and giggles for us either.
What you like up your ass does not pertain to this thread.
-
What you like up your ass does not pertain to this thread.
I must say, you were due a good one. Finally! Damn if he didn't deliver.
-
Also seeing that the 2014 poll only consisted of 98 Native Americans.
I'm not entirely sure that it's exactly possible to have a representative sample from that. Still, it's a decade more recent.
And I think that number also has increased because - like you said earlier - theyve been told how to think. This thing was beaten to death until people started to agree.
-
I don't care what the Indians think.
They have no guts if they change the name.
-
I don't care what the Indians think.
They have no guts if they change the name.
I have enough American Indian in me to be insulted by this comment, pale face.
-
If they see this through, then where does it end?
-
I have enough American Indian in me to be insulted by this comment, pale face.
Thought we'd already established that the contents of your anus are immaterial to the discussion.
-
Thought we'd already established that the contents of your anus are immaterial to the discussion.
What's with this obsession with my anus and people want to stuff things up it? This really makes me uncomfortable.
-
What's with this obsession with my anus and people want to stuff things up it? This really makes me uncomfortable.
I'd imagine it's quite uncomfortable, but I'll defer to you.
-
Walter Lewis was a full blooded Cherokee Indian.
-
I'd imagine it's quite uncomfortable, but I'll defer to you.
Yes. I can't understand how you developed such an affinity for it at such a young age.
-
The Indians from India are offended that were even saying the word Indian at all here.
-
The Indians from India are offended that were even saying the word Indian at all here.
Well, I'm offended that they can't fucking fix my computer when I call them.