Thread: Obama is Stripping Washington Redskins Trademarks After Owner Refused to Give Up Team

The Federalist Papers

In the land of the free we are being held hostage by the tyranny of political correctness - Robert Griffin III.
Do you agree with RG3 on this one?



Washington Redskins Respond To Obama Trademark Board's Revoking Trademark Of Their Team's Name

We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trademark Trial and...
thefederalistpapers.org

Washington Redskins Respond To Obama Trademark Board’s Revoking Trademark Of Their Team’s Name

By Steve Straub On June 18, 2014 · 4 Comments · In US



The Washington Redskins have responded to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s decision to revoke the trademark for their team’s name and expressed confidence that the ruling will be overturned.

The Redskin’s attorney Bob Raskopf released a statement:

We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s divided ruling will be overturned on appeal. This case is no different than an earlier case, where the Board cancelled the Redskins’ trademark registrations, and where a federal district court disagreed and reversed the Board.
As today’s dissenting opinion correctly states, ‘the same evidence previously found insufficient to support cancellation’ here ‘remains insufficient’ and does not support cancellation.
This ruling – which of course we will appeal – simply addresses the team’s federal trademark registrations, and the team will continue to own and be able to protect its marks without the registrations. The registrations will remain effective while the case is on appeal.
When the case first arose more than 20 years ago, a federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled on appeal in favor of the Washington Redskins and their trademark registrations.
Why?
As the district court’s ruling made clear in 2003, the evidence ‘is insufficient to conclude that during the relevant time periods the trademark at issue disparaged Native Americans…’ The court continued, ‘The Court concludes that the [Board’s] finding that the marks at issue ‘may disparage’ Native Americans is unsupported by substantial evidence, is logically flawed, and fails to apply the correct legal standard to its own findings of fact.’ Those aren’t my words. That was the court’s conclusion. We are confident that when a district court review’s today’s split decision, it will reach a similar conclusion.


http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/u...eir-teams-name

Mark Levin

Correcting the misinformation about the Redskins



MARK LEVIN: The Redskins still OWN their name, logo and will sue you and WIN if you try to use it
Mark Levin corrects the record today on all the misinformation he's heard on the...
The Right Scoop

MARK LEVIN: The Redskins still OWN their name, logo and will sue you and WIN if you try to use it

Posted on Jun 18, 2014 at 7:08 PM in Politics | Leave a Comment
By The Right Scoop

Mark Levin corrects the record today on all the misinformation he’s heard on the news today regarding the cancellation of the federally registered trademark ‘Redskins.’

Levin argues that despite the Obama administration ruling, the Redskins still own their name and logo and still own the use of their name and logo because of Common Law. And if you try and use their name and logo, Levin says the Redskins will sue you and will win because there is not a court in the land that won’t uphold Common Law.

Listen to his full explanation:

Video at the page link:

http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-...try-to-use-it/

BREAKING NEWS: U.S. Government PC Police Launch Attack on the Washington Redskins, Canceling Trademarks

By Norvell Rose
9 10:50 am June 18, 2014

Unbelievable! Political correctness truly run wild. The federal government, under the guise of protecting American Indians from racial insults perpetrated by an NFL team, has launched an all-out regulatory attack on the Washington Redskins.
The Washington Post has early word on this breaking story:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office has canceled the Washington Redskins trademark registration, calling the football team’s name “disparaging to Native Americans.”
The landmark case, which appeared before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, was filed on behalf of five Native Americans. It was the second time such a case was filed.
“This victory was a long time coming and reflects the hard work of many attorneys at our firm,” said lead attorney Jesse Witten, of Drinker Biddle & Reath.
Federal trademark law does not permit registration of trademarks that “may disparage” individuals or groups or “bring them into contempt or disrepute.” The ruling pertains to six different trademarks associated with the team, each containing the word “Redskin.”

Redskins’ owner Daniel Snyder has repeatedly said he will not change the name of his ball club. We shall see if Snyder’s resolve holds up in light of this momentous decision.

http://www.libertynews.com/2014/06/b...ng-trademarks/

We’ve Seen This Story Before: Redskins Respond to Obama Admin’s Ruling On ‘Disparaging’ Team Name

6,391 Shares By Kyle Becker 1 hour ago



After the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office cancelled trademark protections for the NFL’s Washington Redskins franchise, deciding that the team name and logo were “disparaging,” the Redskins once again provided a reality check for the Obama administration.
The Washington Redskins’ attorney Bob Raskopf replied to the ruling in a statement (via the Washington Post):

“We’ve seen this story before. And just like last time, today’s ruling will have no effect at all on the team’s ownership of and right to use the Redskins name and logo.

‘Redskins Are Denied Trademarks’
-Washington Post, April 3, 1999

‘Redskins Can Keep Trademark, Judge Rules’
-Washington Post, October 2, 2003

We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s divided ruling will be overturned on appeal. This case is no different than an earlier case, where the Board cancelled the Redskins’ trademark registrations, and where a federal district court disagreed and reversed the Board.

As today’s dissenting opinion correctly states, “the same evidence previously found insufficient to support cancellation” here “remains insufficient” and does not support cancellation.

This ruling – which of course we will appeal – simply addresses the team’s federal trademark registrations, and the team will continue to own and be able to protect its marks without the registrations. The registrations will remain effective while the case is on appeal.

When the case first arose more than 20 years ago, a federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled on appeal in favor of the Washington Redskins and their trademark registrations.

Why?

As the district court’s ruling made clear in 2003, the evidence ‘is insufficient to conclude that during the relevant time periods the trademark at issue disparaged Native Americans…’ The court continued, ‘The Court concludes that the [Board’s] finding that the marks at issue ‘may disparage’ Native Americans is unsupported by substantial evidence, is logically flawed, and fails to apply the correct legal standard to its own findings of fact.’ Those aren’t my words. That was the court’s conclusion. We are confident that when a district court review’s today’s split decision, it will reach a similar conclusion.

In today’s ruling, the Board’s Marc Bergsman agreed, concluding in his dissenting opinion:

It is astounding that the petitioners did not submit any evidence regarding the Native American population during the relevant time frame, nor did they introduce any evidence or argument as to what comprises a substantial composite of that population thereby leaving it to the majority to make petitioner’s case have some semblance of meaning.

The evidence in the current claim is virtually identical to the evidence a federal judge decided was insufficient more than ten years ago. We expect the same ultimate outcome here.”

U.S. attorney and conservative radio host Mark Levin pointed out that Common Law legally prevents other parties from commercially using the Redskins’ team name and logo. The Washington football team’s name has not been “cancelled” and they are not being forced to use a different name and logo.
No team picks a name & logo that they find to be insulting or demeaning – that simply defies credulity. The Washington Redskins’ history bears this out and the team has stated repeatedly that its name is a tribute, not a “slur.”
Former team owner George Marshall, the man who changed the team name from the Boston Braves to the “Redskins” in the 1930s, is now buried on Indian Mound Cemetery in Romney, West Virginia. Indeed, the team fight song is “Hail to the Redskins” – so much for its name being “disparaging”!
Of course, the selective way in that the Obama administration chooses whose rights to protect and whose rights not to protect raises serious questions. In no way does the perceived offense of any group overrule the equal rights of all Americans to free speech and intellectual property rights.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/1486...ing-team-name/

Hmmm

How about changing the name to "Reid Nuts"


This is shades of the Clippers fiasco, stealing someones business...guess Obama want to show he built it or destroyed it.."What difference does it Make"!!!!

The Federalist Papers

Barack Obama and his minions have weaponized government agencies to harass their political opponents and destroy anything they dislike. Where will it end?

Just like the IRS



Why The Obama Trademark Board's Ruling Against The Redskins Should Terrify You - [SEE HERE]
This ruling happened precisely because the campaign against the Redskins has...
thefederalistpapers.org

Why The Obama Trademark Board’s Ruling Against The Redskins Should Terrify You

By Steve Straub On June 19, 2014 · 2 Comments · In US



While the ruling by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s decision to revoke the trademark for the Washington Redskins name would seem to be a relatively small issue, given what going on around us, it should scare us all. It’s a really big deal, and here’s why.

Via Robert Tracinski at The Federalist:

This ruling happened precisely because the campaign against the Redskins has failed in the court of public opinion. The issue has become the hobby horse of a small group of lefty commentators and politicians in DC, while regular Washingtonians, the people who make up the team’s base of fans and customers, are largely indifferent. So the left resorted to one of its favorite fallbacks. If the people can’t be persuaded, use the bureaucracy—in this case, two political appointees on the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
That’s what is disturbing about this ruling. Our system of government depends on the impartial administration of the laws by the executive. In this case, executive officials declared that a private company doesn’t deserve the protection of the law: if the ruling survives an appeal in the courts, the federal government will stop prosecuting violations of the team’s intellectual property rights, potentially costing it millions of dollars.
This ruling isn’t a slippery slope. It’s a slope we’ve already slid down: bureaucrats in Washington are now empowered to make subjective decrees about what is offensive and what will be tolerated, based on pressure from a small clique of Washington insiders. Anyone who runs afoul of these decrees, anyone branded as regressive and politically incorrect, is declared outside the protection of the federal government.

That bureaucrats in Washington are now empowered to make subjective decrees about what is offensive and what will be tolerated, based on pressure from a small clique of Washington insiders, should scare us all, even if you don’t care one way or the other about the Washington Redskins or their team’s name.
Barack Obama and his minions have weaponized government agencies to harass their political opponents and destroy anything they dislike. Where will it end?


http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/u...ld-terrify-you

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is the 2nd Government Agency that has been "Weaponized" against Obama's Enemy's

the 1st was the IRS

Twitchy

Apparently the Patent Office is now also the P.C. Police - unbelievable!



'Oh good gravy'! USPTO cancels Redskins trademarks, but we bet this gal's thrilled
Twitchy

More nuttiness at the link:

http://twitchy.com/2014/06/18/oh-goo...paign=twupdate

"On behalf of those professionals in the moving industry, we object to the offensive name 'Packers.'"

Look out Dallas Cowpersons, you're next.

I'm pretty sure the Dallas "Cowboys" are deeply offensive to gauchos the world over.

I'm pretty sure the Miami "Heat" is disparaging to the climate.

more at the Twitchy page link

Patent/Trademark Office Says Redskins is Insulting to Indians, But How Are These Other Registered Names Not Disparaging to Women?

By Eric Odom
2 3:53 pm June 19, 2014

The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office was likely just doing what someone above their pay grade wanted them to do when it came to their politically fueled decision to strip the Washington Redskins of their trademark brand. The decision, however, very well may open up a huge can of worms in that new scrutiny will start bubbling on other registered brands that are far more blatantly disparaging to a certain group of people.

In this case… women.
Via WZ.

The patent and trademark office says that the name “Redskins” is disparaging to a race of people because it potentially offends 30% of the American population. What about women, though?
According to the census last taken in the United States, women account for 50.8% of the population in America. So what now? Should all of the women in America who feel aggrieved by businesses using the word “Whore” or “Slut” file complaints too?

Here are WZ’s example screenshots.




http://www.libertynews.com/2014/06/p...ging-to-women/