View Full Version : Is no one really concerned about this?
Trapper John
06-19-2014, 10:33
http://fullscalesports.com/2014/06/18/us-patent-office-removes-trademark-for-disparaging-redskins-name/
Have we really come to the point that our property can be seized/devalued by the government without due process because, well, it's deemed politically incorrect? :mad:
Mark Levin, radio talk show host and President of Landmark Legal Foundation (http://www.landmarklegal.org/DesktopDefault.aspx), explained on his show yesterday that all this will do is get a lot of people sued. Common Law still applies and anyone who tries to capitalize on this decision can be sued. He also had an audio recording of Harry Reid admitting that a sitting Senator was instrumental in the ruling. This, most likely, is illegal.
Pat
Trapper John
06-19-2014, 11:18
Mark Levin, radio talk show host and President of Landmark Legal Foundation (http://www.landmarklegal.org/DesktopDefault.aspx), explained on his show yesterday that all this will do is get a lot of people sued. Common Law still applies and anyone who tries to capitalize on this decision can be sued. He also had an audio recording of Harry Reid admitting that a sitting Senator was instrumental in the ruling. This, most likely, is illegal.
Pat
Pat- I am almost certain that this is illegal. It's the fact that the USPTO tried this knowing that it won't hold water is what is so concerning. We have an Executive Branch that has gone rogue IMO.
GratefulCitizen
06-19-2014, 11:22
One of the places I deliver in the Navajo Nation is the school in Red Mesa.
The school mascot is "Redskins".
This must be especially disparaging to the 99% of the school children who are Native American.
Since this is within the Navajo Nation, maybe the BIA (Bureau of Indian affairs) should look into it.
Pat- I am almost certain that this is illegal. It's the fact that the USPTO tried this knowing that it won't hold water is what is so concerning. We have an Executive Branch that has gone rogue IMO.
Agreed. ;)
Pat
http://fullscalesports.com/2014/06/18/us-patent-office-removes-trademark-for-disparaging-redskins-name/
Have we really come to the point that our property can be seized/devalued by the government without due process because, well, it's deemed politically incorrect? :mad:
Yes, we are at that point.
No, nobody cares.
Hell, the Attorney General has been held in contempt of congress...
No action - no outrage.
Clearly, nobody cares.
Lets face facts, "they" have won. The POTUS said he was going to fundamentaly change America.
He did.
...and here we are.
next question....
ddoering
06-19-2014, 13:14
They had to find a dept of government that was not already under investigation of wrong doing so their options were rather limitted.
ddoering
06-19-2014, 13:16
On another note, perhaps we should sue to have the White House renamed. I find that name offensive. Of course they could call it Crazy-ass Cracker House since that seemed to be ok not too long ago.
Trapper John
06-19-2014, 13:20
On another note, perhaps we should sue to have the White House renamed. I find that name offensive. Of course they could call it Crazy-ass Cracker House since that seemed to be ok not too long ago.
Now, I don't care who ya are, that's funny rat there! :D:D
I know this has been in other threads but, this is why we are where we are:
http://www.howobamagotelected.com/media-malpractice-obama-voter-video.asp
I am sure the ignorance crosses both sides. This is the electorate.
We're done for.
Of course WE are concerned but that does not make a whole lot of difference. It is one outrageous incident after another. The Redskins fiasco is nothing compared to the warehousing of all these illegal immigrant children tens of THOUSANDS and more predicted to come. I will do my speaking at the polls in November but for now all I can do is remain a bitter clinger.
On another note, perhaps we should sue to have the White House renamed. I find that name offensive. Of course they could call it Crazy-ass Cracker House since that seemed to be ok not too long ago.
I like it!:D
Badger52
06-19-2014, 14:29
This brings the patent office up to parity with the other executive branch agencies. Way out of their lane, over-stepping their authority, and no consequences. They might need their own cabinet-level seat at the table if they keep up this stellar performance.
(Maybe they'll get absorbed by DHS and get a bunch of free ammo & stuff.)
It's only a tiny baby step to "Your patent on the new antibiotic you developed is voided for the common good."
MSNBC declares "Redskins" a racial slur: "I am an idiot!" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUt2YTVrxRc). :D
Pat
NurseTim
06-19-2014, 15:50
It's only a tiny baby step to "Your patent on the new antibiotic you developed is voided for the common good."
Wasn't this done to Reardon Steel in "Atlas Shrugged"?
Badger52
06-19-2014, 16:52
What would be the basis for using it in a non pejorative sense?The matter at issue, along with another example already in this thread, might be a couple. Helluva lot better than being a New York Metropolitan.
Our local HS got their teams' names changed, pre-emptively (from simply "Indians") and the local Native Americans were somewhat upset; they thought it was cool. But someone came to work one afternoon at the school board, with their assumed historical guilt on their sleeve, and the rest is history.
Is there any question that redskin is, in general, a disparaging term for Native Americans?
What would be the basis for using it in a non pejorative sense?
If it is, in fact, a disparaging term, Section 1203 of the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure holds water as a reason for this rejection.
How about the United Negro College Fund and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? :confused:
Pat
Politics More: Redskins Native American
Meet The Native American Grandmother Who Just Beat The Washington Redskins
Hunter Walker
Jun. 18, 2014, 12:41 l
AP
Suzan Harjo.
The woman who was the driving force behind the cases that led the U.S. Patents and Trademarks Office to cancel the federal trademarks for the Washington Redskins Wednesday is 69-year-old grandmother and longtime Native American activist, Suzan Harjo.
"Suzan has been fighting this since 1992. Native American people have been fighting this since 1972. ... The reason it has come up recently is because Suzan has worked really hard to bring this in the public eye," Amanda Blackhorse, one of the five Native American plaintiffs in the case filed before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, told Business Insider.
"She's just a tremendous woman. She's a strong Native American woman, and I'm so happy to have met her and to have been a part of all this because this is what we need to do," Blackhorse added.
Harjo was born in Oklahoma and is of Cheyenne and Muscogee ancestry. In a conversation with Business Insider shortly after the U.S. Patents and Trademarks Office's decision was announced, Harjo said she became involved with political activism while she was still in school.
"One time when I was in school, I was selected by our Cheyenne leadership to come to Washington with them. And when my family asked, 'Why do you want her to go?' They said, 'Because she talks good and she ain't afraid of nobody.' So, those became resumé items," Harjo recounted.
In high school, Harjo was inspired to fight against what she describes as "racist stereotypes in American sports" because of an Oklahoma Native American activist named Clyde Warrior.
"He made a personal cause of getting rid of the mascot 'Little Red' at the University of Oklahoma," Harjo said of Warrior. "Most of the Indians in Oklahoma couldn't stand 'Little Red' and we called him the dancing idiot. He was always portrayed by a white guy in Indian costume."
Little Red was eventually banished by University of Oklahoma President J. Herbert Hollomon in 1970.
According to Harjo, activists involved in the effort to eliminate Native American mascots always viewed the Washington Redskins football team as "the worst" offender.
"No matter where you went or what was the mascot fight of the moment in any locale, everyone would always say, 'And the worst one is right there in the nation's capital, the Washington team name,'" said Harjo. "It was the worst one, everyone pointed to it."
Harjo moved to Washington D.C. in 1974. Soon after her arrival, she said someone gave her and her husband tickets to a Redskins game.
"We're football fans and we can separate the team name from the game, so we went to a game. And we didn't stay for the game at all, because people started — someone said something, 'Are you this or that?' So, we started to answer, then people started like pulling our hair," explained Harjo. "And they would call us that name and it was very weird for us. So, we just left and never went to another game."
Harjo said her experience at the Redskins game "solidified" her opposition to stereotypical Native American sports mascots.
"That just solidified it for me because it wasn't just namecalling, it was what the name had promoted," Harjo said. "That's the example of what objectification is. You strip the person of humanity and they're just an object and you can do anything.
You strip the person of humanity and they're just an object and you can do anything.
You can pull their hair! I wouldn't even touch someone else!"
Harjo, who eventually became the first president of the Morning Star Institute, a D.C.-based national Native rights organization, began looking for ways to change the Redskins name. She said she settled on the strategy of trying to get the team's trademark canceled after she was contacted by a Minneapolis lawyer named Stephen Baird in 1992.
According to Harjo, Baird was working on a law review article about his theory the Redskins' trademark could be canceled based on a section of the U.S. Trademark Act prohibiting trademarks that "may disparage ... persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols." Harjo said Baird heard she had "looked at all sorts of causes of action, and not settled on any of them, and had been talking with various attorneys about ways that we could approach this." When Baird called her, Harjo said his "first question" was why she rejected using the Patent and Trademark Office as a forum to fight the Redskins name.
"And I said, 'I have no idea what you're talking about,'" Harjo remembered with a laugh. "Once he explained his theory, I was so intrigued by his theory. It was very different from the kinds of things we'd been looking at. ... It didn't interfere with free speech, it wasn't even forcing a decision. What it's saying is, 'Here's what the federal government will or will not sanction.' Because, it's the federal government's role to grant the exclusive privilege of making money off this name."
After she decided to use Baird's strategy, Harjo brought a case to the Patent and Trademark Office with herself as the plaintiff in 1992. Though she was initially victorious in 1999, the Redskins appealed in federal district court and eventually won due to something Harjo termed a "technicality" – the federal judge ruled Harjo was too old to be the plaintiff and should have brought the case closer to her 18th birthday.
"We wondered if she wasn't, you know, a cheerleader for the team," Harjo said of the judge. "It turned out that she and her husband, actually they were regular attendees of the team games and her husband, his law firm had represented the team at one point."
As her case began to lose appeals, Harjo said she began organizing what she described as the "young people's lawsuit" in 2005. She began watching protests against stereotypical mascots in order to recruit young Native Americans who were committed to the cause and could serve as plaintiffs in a new case that could not be appealed on the same grounds.
"It seemed like 18-24 ... those were the brackets," said Harjo. "That's what many courts had said about what constitutes young people."
Amanda Blackhorse.
Amanda Blackhorse was the first person recruited by Harjo. At the time she was 24 and had organized a protest at a game between the Redskins and the Kansas City Chiefs. Blackhorse is a Navajo woman who currently does social work with the Navajo Nation in Kayenta, Arizona. She told Business Insider her work in the community has reinforced her belief stereotypical sports mascots need to be eliminated.
"I have an interest in what we call historical trauma, the oppression that Native Americans went through and continue to go through has a tremendous effect on our mental health and our overall well being as people," Blackhorse said. "So, that is something that is my passion. ... We need to work on healing our people and to also educate the public about the oppression that we have experienced and continue to experience, like these mascots."
Harjo said she was "very honest" with the five young people who joined the case about how difficult it would be to fight a legal battle against a pro-football team worth over a billion dollars.
"It's not for everyone and I was frank about the kinds of pressures that they would be up against," said Harjo. "They go through your garbage and they hire P.I.'s. It's a nasty business. They're mean, and they're big, and they have lots of money ."
"They go through your garbage and they hire P.I.'s. It's a nasty business. They're mean, and they're big, and they have lots of money ."
In addition to opposition from the team, Harjo said her work against the Redskins name has earned her death threats from the team's supporters, some of whom she described as "fanatics."
"Even if I'm here working right by the phone, I do not answer it even if I'm expecting a certain call at a certain time," Harjo said. "We get a lot of hangups and some of those, I just assume now, are the death threats. And some of them are just – I don't want to hear people yelling at me even if they're not exactly threatening my life. ... I had to get a restraining order against one stalker who had developed a hostile fixation against me."
Though Harjo's "young people's lawsuit" was filed in 2006, it was put on hold until Harjo's attorneys exhausted all their remedies in the original case. Harjo said this occurred when the Supreme Court did not take up the case at the end of 2009.
Once the Patent and Trademark Office took up the new suit, Harjo said she was confident it would rule against the Redskins based on the fact the younger plaintiffs eliminated the "technicality" that caused her to lose her case on appeal.
"I was expecting it daily," she said. "I was expecting it and I was expecting a victory."
Harjo said she found out about the victory Wednesday morning after getting an email from the lead attorney on the case.
"Then almost immediately, my son and grandson called and the voice I heard on the answering machine was congratulations from my little grandson, which was wonderful," said Harjo.
"Then almost immediately, my son and grandson called and the voice I heard on the answering machine was congratulations from my little grandson, which was wonderful," said Harjo.
After this victory, Harjo thinks other teams with offensive Native American mascots need to "get in line."
"We've made tremendous progress. There were a little over 3,000 of these in 1970 and now there are just a little over 900," she explained. "So, we have eliminated over 2/3 of these racist stereotypes in American sports."
Harjo is particularly adamant that the Cleveland Indians baseball team needs to get rid of its mascot.
"I mean, Chief Wahoo is really the graphic equivalent of the name of the Washington team," said Harjo.
However, Harjo said she doesn't necessarily need to do anything for the anti-mascot movement to notch another victory in Cleveland. Based on the precedent this case established, she said other Native Americans can get trademarks cancelled without a lawsuit.
"They would just have to write a letter and say we're in the same position ... and we want the same internal ruling and it would be changed very easily," Harjo said. "Happily, I don't have to do anything. I mean there are people, lots of Native and non-Native people in Cleveland who want to get rid of that name and those images and are working in that direction. So, they're going to do what they will with or without me."
Harjo said a major change that has occurred in recent years is that the push to eliminate Native American mascots is no longer "just one person's fight."
"I have had the privilege of being the kind of the face of this fight, but I stand for lots and lots of people who are either vocal about it, or who want to be a part of it, or who are a part of it. This is not a small group of people," said Harjo. "Now, it's their fight. ... We've said now is the time for everyone to just jump into this so that it's not on the backs of a few people, especially a few young Native people."
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-the-native-american-grandmother-who-just-beat-the-redskins-2014-6#ixzz358JiprUk
Point of order..
There are no Native Americans
Just an argument over date of arrival.
This is not a solid argument.
Both the NAACP and the United Negro College Fund have actively been trying to shift attention away from the 'Negro' and 'Colored' part of their business names for years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/17/business/media/17adco.html?ex=1358312400&en=9ea1e9b5b0107c07&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink&_r=0
Maybe Snyder is too, paleface. ;)
Pat
Trapper John
06-19-2014, 19:34
The real question here is did Ms Harjo file a hurt feelings report first?
Trapper John
06-19-2014, 19:48
And what do we do about those highly offensive "redskin" potatoes. A slur, a slur I say on the proud Native American heritage - why the nerve and insensitivity comparing Native Americans to potatoes. Just shameful, utterly shameful. I say the Department of Agriculture needs to ban this shameful product and fine the farmers promoting this slur on Native Americans.
Okie, you are a white opressor, stop trying to twist this into something it isn't or I will report you to the IRS.
12 Trademarks Declared Less Offensive Than Redskins
http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/18/12-trademarks-declared-less-offensive-than-redskins/
Figgas over Niggas
Kraut Kap
Dago Swagg
Cracka Azz Skateboards
You Can’t Make A Housewife Out Of A Whore
Blanco Basura
Home Cookin Biscuit Head
Mammy Jamia’s
Uppity Negro
All Natural My Dadz Nutz Carmelized Jumbo Redskins
‘teensdoporn.com’
Gypsy Soule Women Who Live By Their Own Rules
Hmmmmmm
Washington Winnebagos. Fixed.
Richard
The term "Yankee" offends me, it's like a "Quicky" only by yourself and should not be allowed to be trademarked.
Washington Winnebagos. Fixed.
Richard
The don't have to change their name just their logo. I thought of this idea after seeing TJ's post, and then found that someone had already done the artwork. I hope that any appeal/suit the team raises/files fails. This should have happened decades ago.
The don't have to change their name just their logo.
It looks like they don't have to 'change' their logo, either, they just can't keep it 'trademarked' for proprietory use (if the courts don't overrule the USTPO).
From the USTPO:
"This decision by the TTAB does not necessarily put an end to the larger dispute between the parties, as Pro Football, Inc. may seek review by a federal court of today’s decision. The registrations will remain “on the federal register of marks” and not be listed in the USPTO’s records as “cancelled” until after any judicial review is completed."
What this decision does not mean: this decision does not, however, require the Washington D.C. professional football team to change its name or stop using the trademarks at issue in this case.
Losing the federal registration of a trademark does not necessarily mean that the owner loses all legal rights in the mark. This is because trademark rights in the United States come from use of a mark on or in conjunction with goods or services, not merely from the additional, optional step of federal registration.
The TTAB determines only whether a mark can be registered with the federal government (and thus gain the additional legal benefits thereof), not whether it can be used.
The mark owner may still have rights in the mark based on use, known as “common law” rights - and those use-based rights may continue to exist even if a federal registration is cancelled.
http://www.uspto.gov/news/USPTO_Official_Fact_Sheet_on_TTAB_decision_in_Blac khorse_v_Pro_Football_Inc.pdf
And so it goes...
Richard
Trapper John
06-20-2014, 19:01
The don't have to change their name just their logo. I thought of this idea after seeing TJ's post, and then found that someone had already done the artwork. I hope that any appeal/suit the team raises/files fails. This should have happened decades ago.
:lifter