Redskins!

[SkyDekker 1,141]

Southern_Man

***It's actually shocking to see some of the existing trademarks they have protected.
Thereby making this one being singled out even more silly.
You think this one's offensive?
Go take a peek.

Well, I'm not singling out anything. Somebody filed. If you have standing and want to file against the other offensive trademarks you should do so.

I think this is the important part ot remember.

The trademark office didn't just decide on their own. Somebody filed a claim, which they ruled on.

[normiss 622]

I gonna get a shop at the flea market. Or stall, whatever it's called.

First order : Redskins team stuff.
Second order : file claims against remaining teams with questionably racist team names.

Then dig for more.
Should be worth a few mil easy.

[Southern_Man 0]

turtlespeed

Sooo "FAG" is OK as a trademark, but Redskins, not so much.

[facepalm]

So, file a complaint against that one.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[quade 3]

regulator

******If it's just a sport's team name, why all the hub-bub to begin with?

Because it is racially offensive. Change it and there will be no issue.

Honestly at this point I'm confused why the league hasn't stepped in and done a Sterling.

Who are you to be the one who decides if its racially motivated? Have fun fighting daniel snyder. Its a loosing battle that is tying up resources that could be devoted towards...well something remotely pertinant.

I didn't say, "racially motivated." I said, "Because it is racially offensive."

And it's not up to ME. It's up to the people who belong to the group being referenced and are offended by it. In this case, a group who was offended enough to take it to court. They won in a court of law, not because of anything I said.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Southern_Man 0]

quade

And it's not up to ME. It's up to the people who belong to the group being referenced and are offended by it. In this case, a group who was offended enough to take it to court. They won in a court of law, not because of anything I said.

Best I can tell it is not really a court of law. More like an internal review procedure. Although they do call them judges.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[quade 3]

Fair point.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Channman 2]

> "Redskins refers only to the color of their skin" Red??? I think more Brown is the color of their skin...but then I'm not as enlightened as many here seem to be.

[Channman 2]

Southern_Man

***
And it's not up to ME. It's up to the people who belong to the group being referenced and are offended by it. In this case, a group who was offended enough to take it to court. They won in a court of law, not because of anything I said.

Best I can tell it is not really a court of law. More like an internal review procedure. Although they do call them judges.

The trademark was cancelled in 1999 and was overturned on appeal in 2003. And now, the process starts all over.

[turtlespeed 212]

normiss

I thought it customary to do your own research.

I did . . and posted a link for those of you that are challenged.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[normiss 622]

You're so busy complaining that you missed the link I did include in my initial reply.
Yes, it was an edited add.
Mere milliseconds after posting the reply, yet prior to your complain of the lack thereof.
Do keep up.

[Southern_Man 0]

Channman

******
And it's not up to ME. It's up to the people who belong to the group being referenced and are offended by it. In this case, a group who was offended enough to take it to court. They won in a court of law, not because of anything I said.

Best I can tell it is not really a court of law. More like an internal review procedure. Although they do call them judges.

The trademark was cancelled in 1999 and was overturned on appeal in 2003. And now, the process starts all over.

Yup, I presume the record is more robust this time but I don't know.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Andy9o8 0]

Channman

******
And it's not up to ME. It's up to the people who belong to the group being referenced and are offended by it. In this case, a group who was offended enough to take it to court. They won in a court of law, not because of anything I said.

Best I can tell it is not really a court of law. More like an internal review procedure. Although they do call them judges.

The trademark was cancelled in 1999 and was overturned on appeal in 2003. And now, the process starts all over.

On the bright side, you know who wins in all this, don't you?

3, 2, 1....

[DanG 1]

Quote

> "Redskins refers only to the color of their skin" Red??? I think more Brown is the color of their skin...but then I'm not as enlightened as many here seem to be.

Just like Asian people aren't really yellow, Africans aren't really black, and Caucasians aren't really white.

It's a racial reference, not a description of the color wheel.

- Dan G

[quade 3]

Andy9o8

On the bright side, you know who wins in all this, don't you?

3, 2, 1....

The supply v demand aspects of the legal profession are pretty impressive. It appears as if there will never be a shortage of people wanting to sue somebody else and it's something that can't really be off-shored.

I should have been a lawyer.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Southern_Man 0]

Andy9o8

On the bright side, you know who wins in all this, don't you?

3, 2, 1....

Not enough business in this town for one lawyer but plenty for two

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[normiss 622]

Best be careful regarding the trademark though.

[billvon 2,426]

>Who says the Washington DC NFL team isn't allowed to be called Redskins? They
>are allowed to call themselves that, what they have lost is the ability to make a lot
>of money off the name.

Bingo. They want to call themselves the lazy niggers, go for it.

Of course, if that happened, they'd sue every single promoter, stadium, network and advertiser that refused to work with them just because of their name. They wouldn't do that not because it would offend people, but because some very rich people would find themselves less rich at the end of it. Anyone who thinks this is a team and not a business is deluding themselves.

[mccurley 0]

Quote

I understand the intent, I do. It's just silly to start down this path IMO.
I can't wait for the lawsuit when someone hears an offensive 4-way or 10-way team name announced over the PA at your local DZ.

Like "Buster Hyman & The Thrusters"

Watch my video Fat Women
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRWkEky8GoI

[normiss 622]

Here is an excellent opinion piece on what this means.



Also, the worst skydive team name I ever heard was
"(DZO name) likes little boys"
That one always bothered me to hear.

[wolfriverjoe 1,351]

For an individual, privately owned and operated business, I agree wholeheartedly with the opinions in that piece.

But pro football is not that. It's an effective monopoly. The NFL itself is a multi-billion dollar business, but the League is a not-for-profit organization. Really.

The teams play in stadiums that are usually built with public money.
The teams get huge tax breaks and financial support from local and state coffers.

Which (IMO) takes them far enough out of the "private business" classification that pressuring this name change is appropriate.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[SkyDekker 1,141]

As I was reading the article, I kept thinking that the same arguments are being used by the CRTC to ban speech and content on public airwaves.

The US has always been heavily involved in dictating morality, I am not sure I am buying the argument that now it is different.

[Amazon 7]

SkyDekker

As I was reading the article, I kept thinking that the same arguments are being used by the CRTC to ban speech and content on public airwaves.

The US has always been heavily involved in dictating morality, I am not sure I am buying the argument that now it is different.

DUUUUDE those idiots can not even handle a breast being shown on TV and more than half of the living population has them.. its idiotic.

[normiss 622]

Monetary value of an organization is the defining measurement now?
They are a business.

[wolfriverjoe 1,351]

normiss

Monetary value of an organization is the defining measurement now?
They are a business.

They are a business that depends very heavily on public funding. When they build their own stadiums to play in, when they drop the "not for profit" status for the league, then maybe.

To compare them with a normal, private business is not accurate, IMO.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[ryoder 1,397]

John Oliver discusses the Redskins legal appeal of the cancellation of their trademark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O9r33bjzAM

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.