What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Do you think Snyder should change the name of the Redskins? (1 Viewer)

Should the Washington Redskins change their name?

  • No

    Votes: 312 43.3%

  • Yes

    Votes: 320 44.4%

  • Meh

    Votes: 89 12.3%
  • Total voters
    721
TobiasFunke said:
Henry Ford said:
The PTO decision I linked to upthread was decided in 1999. The final disposition of the case was when the Supreme Court denied cert at the end of 2009.
Click to expand...
Yeah but that's because it was remanded on a procedural issue. The original litigation took six years to get from the PTO through the District Court to the DC Circuit. Would be surprised if it took that long this time around.
Click to expand...
Better get that printing press started, then.

 
This TTAB ruling only cancels and applies to the federal trademark registrations, so even if the appeal fails, which I expect it will, the Redskins and Snyder still have a whole arsenal of common law and state trademark and unfair competition and related claims to use to try to stop people from selling goods using Redskins marks....

...but this is probably the beginning of the end, IMO. I think the NFL will step in soon and then it will only be a matter of time. As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.

 
Todd Andrews said:
This TTAB ruling only cancels and applies to the federal trademark registrations, so even if the appeal fails, which I expect it will, the Redskins and Snyder still have a whole arsenal of common law and state trademark and unfair competition and related claims to use to try to stop people from selling goods using Redskins marks....

...but this is probably the beginning of the end, IMO. I think the NFL will step in soon and then it will only be a matter of time. As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
There's a reasonable - though old - body of case law refusing to extend common law trademark protection to offensive marks.

 
Great news- there's a shark pool thread on this subject.

A little slow so far, but there's some real gems. This, for example, is amazing:

Bojang0301 said:
So this is what the most important thing for our government to do? I know every generation says it but we seriously are a big turd streaking around a toilet bowl.
Click to expand...
I considered pointing out that this is actually the government deciding NOT to do something. But then I figured better to just sit back and watch the show.

 
I saw the patent office canceled the trademark, and didn't realize that was an option. Still think the guy can change the name to the Warriors and/ or change the mascot, and people will stop protesting for this.

 
When Snyder passes away the name will change. http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/06/al-michaels-redskins-jim-rome

The name is going to change eventually. Right now this may be debated in coming election. What is your stance on abortion? Immigration? The Redskins nickname? If you think they should change the name of keep the name it does not matter. This is great theatre with Snyder digging in and taking on all comers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
Todd Andrews said:
This TTAB ruling only cancels and applies to the federal trademark registrations, so even if the appeal fails, which I expect it will, the Redskins and Snyder still have a whole arsenal of common law and state trademark and unfair competition and related claims to use to try to stop people from selling goods using Redskins marks....

...but this is probably the beginning of the end, IMO. I think the NFL will step in soon and then it will only be a matter of time. As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
There's a reasonable - though old - body of case law refusing to extend common law trademark protection to offensive marks.
Click to expand...
Which is why I said Snyder would "try". ;)

 
TheIronSheik said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
Take away the argument about whether the name is bad or not. Forget that whole part for a second.

If people were forcing your favorite team to change their name, wouldn't that make you sad?
Click to expand...
"Sad?" No. Nothing in professional sports - short of a someone's personal tragedy - should make a grown man sad.

 
Not seeing this as the "PR" problem the media is making it out to be, but I haven't really paid too much attention lately. My understanding is that the Indians are getting more and more vocal about this and the numbers of the "offended" are rising. Given that, the name should be changed. However, if it's not changed how many of the Indians that are actually offended part of the Washington fanbase anyway? Does the "PR problem" stem from all the white folks who are additionally up in arms telling everyone they should be offended?

Seems to me, the folks who are offended aren't fans of the team in the first place. At least without a significant double standard. So that leaves all the people telling others they should be offended as the PR problem, right? :oldunsure:

 
TheIronSheik said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
Take away the argument about whether the name is bad or not. Forget that whole part for a second.

If people were forcing your favorite team to change their name, wouldn't that make you sad?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't make me "sad" but it would definitely get my hackles up.

 
RUSF18 said:
TheIronSheik said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
Take away the argument about whether the name is bad or not. Forget that whole part for a second.

If people were forcing your favorite team to change their name, wouldn't that make you sad?
Click to expand...
"Sad?" No. Nothing in professional sports - short of a someone's personal tragedy - should make a grown man sad.
Click to expand...
:confused:

I can think of a dozen things in professional sports that has made me sad over the years...

Detroit Lions fan.. need I say more?

 
RUSF18 said:
TheIronSheik said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
Take away the argument about whether the name is bad or not. Forget that whole part for a second.

If people were forcing your favorite team to change their name, wouldn't that make you sad?
Click to expand...
"Sad?" No. Nothing in professional sports - short of a someone's personal tragedy - should make a grown man sad.
Click to expand...
I believe you would be in the minority. If the Yankees, Packers, Cowboys, Lakers, etc. were forced to change their name, I'm sure a large majority of their supporters would be sad.

 
TheIronSheik said:
RUSF18 said:
TheIronSheik said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
Take away the argument about whether the name is bad or not. Forget that whole part for a second.

If people were forcing your favorite team to change their name, wouldn't that make you sad?
Click to expand...
"Sad?" No. Nothing in professional sports - short of a someone's personal tragedy - should make a grown man sad.
Click to expand...
I believe you would be in the minority. If the Yankees, Packers, Cowboys, Lakers, etc. were forced to change their name, I'm sure a large majority of their supporters would be sad.
Click to expand...
please don't use obscene names. TIA.

 
TheIronSheik said:
RUSF18 said:
TheIronSheik said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
Take away the argument about whether the name is bad or not. Forget that whole part for a second.

If people were forcing your favorite team to change their name, wouldn't that make you sad?
Click to expand...
"Sad?" No. Nothing in professional sports - short of a someone's personal tragedy - should make a grown man sad.
Click to expand...
I believe you would be in the minority. If the Yankees, Packers, Cowboys, Lakers, etc. were forced to change their name, I'm sure a large majority of their supporters would be sad.
Click to expand...
You can pry the Yankees from my cold dead hands.... I think. Doesn't flow quite right.

If you try to change the Yankees name I will either kick some *** or chew bubble gum, and I'm out of bubble gum already. Nah.

Eh, you get the idea.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
TheIronSheik said:
RUSF18 said:
TheIronSheik said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
Take away the argument about whether the name is bad or not. Forget that whole part for a second.

If people were forcing your favorite team to change their name, wouldn't that make you sad?
Click to expand...
"Sad?" No. Nothing in professional sports - short of a someone's personal tragedy - should make a grown man sad.
Click to expand...
I believe you would be in the minority. If the Yankees, Packers, Cowboys, Lakers, etc. were forced to change their name, I'm sure a large majority of their supporters would be sad.
Click to expand...
You can pry the Yankees from my cold dead hands.... I think. Doesn't flow quite right.

If you try to change the Yankees name I will either kick some *** or chew bubble gum, and I'm out of bubble gum already. Nah.

Eh, you get the idea.
Click to expand...
"I came here to solve for X and #### women. And X=3."

 
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
I don't get why people feel the need to tell people what they can and can't feel.

I'm in the same boat as Todd Andrews...I think it's time to change the name, but I'll miss being a "Skins Fan." Not because I'll miss the racial tone of the name, but because that's what I've identified with for my whole life. I have no doubt I'll still be a fan of whatever the team name becomes, and root just as hard, but that doesn't mean I'm not entitled to be sad over having to change my sports identity.

 
RUSF18 said:
TheIronSheik said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
Take away the argument about whether the name is bad or not. Forget that whole part for a second.

If people were forcing your favorite team to change their name, wouldn't that make you sad?
Click to expand...
"Sad?" No. Nothing in professional sports - short of a someone's personal tragedy - should make a grown man sad.
Click to expand...
Guessing not many Bills fans are going to agree with this.

 
Fat Nick said:
the moops said:
Todd Andrews said:
As a lifelong Redskins fan it makes me sad but I understand.
Click to expand...
Sad? It's a ####### team nickname. Who really gives a ####? I just don't get this mentality.
Click to expand...
I don't get why people feel the need to tell people what they can and can't feel.

I'm in the same boat as Todd Andrews...I think it's time to change the name, but I'll miss being a "Skins Fan." Not because I'll miss the racial tone of the name, but because that's what I've identified with for my whole life. I have no doubt I'll still be a fan of whatever the team name becomes, and root just as hard, but that doesn't mean I'm not entitled to be sad over having to change my sports identity.
Click to expand...
Not telling you how to feel or not. Just telling you that I find it ridiculous. :shrug:

I don't really care one way or the other, I'm just like expressing an opinion man

 
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?

 
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
This has been in process since 1997, I believe.

And we should never change things on the basis of "that's how it always has been", huh? Blacks-only water fountains should still exist?

 
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Even setting aside that you clearly didn't bother to understand the nature of the two legal proceedings or the applicable law ... do you really not understand that things change and that it doesn't just mean we're more thin-skinned? Sometimes it's just progress. We used to do a lot of things that were disparaging but now we know better. Is the fact that restaurants like this place no longer exists a good thing, or just a sign that we're more "thin-skinned"?

 
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Well, not only that, but there is a high school on a Native American reservation in Arizona. They're the Red Mesa Redskins. Seems odd to name a team after a slur of yourself, right?

 
MattFancy said:
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Well, not only that, but there is a high school on a Native American reservation in Arizona. They're the Red Mesa Redskins. Seems odd to name a team after a slur of yourself, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's very little precedent in this country for minorities adopting a derogatory slur for use among themselves in order to disarm the word's impact and demonstrate pride and a sense of self.

If I find another example or two, would you be willing to use them in front of members of that minority? You know, since they're not slurs or anything.

 
LOUDOUN COUNTY, Va. – The following is a statement by Bob Raskopf, trademark attorney for the Washington Redskins, regarding today’s split decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board:

“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.”
Click to expand...
 
TobiasFunke said:
MattFancy said:
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Well, not only that, but there is a high school on a Native American reservation in Arizona. They're the Red Mesa Redskins. Seems odd to name a team after a slur of yourself, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's very little precedent in this country for minorities adopting a derogatory slur for use among themselves in order to disarm the word's impact and demonstrate pride and a sense of self.

If I find another example or two, would you be willing to use them in front of members of that minority? You know, since they're not slurs or anything.
Click to expand...
Yeah because colleges like Grambling and Morgan St have mascots that are slurs.

The schools that have Redskins as their mascot, see it as a pride thing.

 
MattFancy said:
TobiasFunke said:
MattFancy said:
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Well, not only that, but there is a high school on a Native American reservation in Arizona. They're the Red Mesa Redskins. Seems odd to name a team after a slur of yourself, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's very little precedent in this country for minorities adopting a derogatory slur for use among themselves in order to disarm the word's impact and demonstrate pride and a sense of self.

If I find another example or two, would you be willing to use them in front of members of that minority? You know, since they're not slurs or anything.
Click to expand...
Yeah because colleges like Grambling and Morgan St have mascots that are slurs.

The schools that have Redskins as their mascot, see it as a pride thing.
Click to expand...
Yes, they do. But that doesn't mean you get to use it as a pride thing. If you think that's unfair, well, I'm sorry. That's just the way it is. Feel free to run around calling your white friends a cracker all day long (assuming you're white) and tell non-whites they can't use it, if it makes you feel better.

As was pointed out when you posted this in the other thread, even the principal of that school said non-Native Americans shouldn't use the word because it "perpetuates the legacy of negativity the term has created."

 
TobiasFunke said:
MattFancy said:
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Well, not only that, but there is a high school on a Native American reservation in Arizona. They're the Red Mesa Redskins. Seems odd to name a team after a slur of yourself, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's very little precedent in this country for minorities adopting a derogatory slur for use among themselves in order to disarm the word's impact and demonstrate pride and a sense of self.

If I find another example or two, would you be willing to use them in front of members of that minority? You know, since they're not slurs or anything.
Click to expand...
I won't have time to read the opinion for a while, but the reporting seemed to indicate that the court found that the minority group could determine what it did and did not find offensive regardless of outside opinion, and the subset could be even smaller. IMO, that's a horrible precedent and could lead to really bad outcomes.

 
TobiasFunke said:
MattFancy said:
TobiasFunke said:
MattFancy said:
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Well, not only that, but there is a high school on a Native American reservation in Arizona. They're the Red Mesa Redskins. Seems odd to name a team after a slur of yourself, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's very little precedent in this country for minorities adopting a derogatory slur for use among themselves in order to disarm the word's impact and demonstrate pride and a sense of self.

If I find another example or two, would you be willing to use them in front of members of that minority? You know, since they're not slurs or anything.
Click to expand...
Yeah because colleges like Grambling and Morgan St have mascots that are slurs.

The schools that have Redskins as their mascot, see it as a pride thing.
Click to expand...
Yes, they do. But that doesn't mean you get to use it as a pride thing. If you think that's unfair, well, I'm sorry. That's just the way it is. Feel free to run around calling your white friends a cracker all day long (assuming you're white) and tell non-whites they can't use it, if it makes you feel better.

As was pointed out when you posted this in the other thread, even the principal of that school said non-Native Americans shouldn't use the word because it "perpetuates the legacy of negativity the term has created."
Click to expand...
And I can show you a quote of a Principal from a HS in Illinois who's schools is named Redskins and has a high Native American population who says the students would be upset if the name changed.

 
MattFancy said:
TobiasFunke said:
MattFancy said:
TobiasFunke said:
MattFancy said:
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Well, not only that, but there is a high school on a Native American reservation in Arizona. They're the Red Mesa Redskins. Seems odd to name a team after a slur of yourself, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's very little precedent in this country for minorities adopting a derogatory slur for use among themselves in order to disarm the word's impact and demonstrate pride and a sense of self.

If I find another example or two, would you be willing to use them in front of members of that minority? You know, since they're not slurs or anything.
Click to expand...
Yeah because colleges like Grambling and Morgan St have mascots that are slurs.

The schools that have Redskins as their mascot, see it as a pride thing.
Click to expand...
Yes, they do. But that doesn't mean you get to use it as a pride thing. If you think that's unfair, well, I'm sorry. That's just the way it is. Feel free to run around calling your white friends a cracker all day long (assuming you're white) and tell non-whites they can't use it, if it makes you feel better.

As was pointed out when you posted this in the other thread, even the principal of that school said non-Native Americans shouldn't use the word because it "perpetuates the legacy of negativity the term has created."
Click to expand...
And I can show you a quote of a Principal from a HS in Illinois who's schools is named Redskins and has a high Native American population who says the students would be upset if the name changed.
Click to expand...
I am sure those kids would somehow get through it. 28 schools in 18 states have changed their name from Redskins since 1988.

 
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
The trademark was issued in 1967. The first lawsuits were filed in 1992 and the trademark was deemed offensive in those cases in 1998 or 1999. The appellate court overturned the cancellation of the trademark based on the particular plaintiffs waiting too long to file, and the remaining requests for cancellation in front of the PTO were stayed while that case went through its appeals. That finished in 2009, and in 2010 the remaining cases were reinstated at the PTO, leading to this ruling.

 
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Without going into the right/wrong/indifferent of this particular case, I'll say that this is 1000% the case, and is a big part of a lot of the problems with this country these days. We've gone beyond equal opportunity and non-discrimination to a place where nobody tolerates anything anymore.

 
Fat Nick said:
johnnycakes said:
If the Redskins name was so "disparaging" to Native Americans, why did it take the Patent Office 82 years to cancel the trademark registration? It wasn't disparaging enough 30 years ago? Or we just more thin-skinned now?
Click to expand...
Without going into the right/wrong/indifferent of this particular case, I'll say that this is 1000% the case, and is a big part of a lot of the problems with this country these days. We've gone beyond equal opportunity and non-discrimination to a place where nobody tolerates anything anymore.
Click to expand...
"People whine too much these days!!!!" is one of my favorite examples of lack of self-awareness ever.

 
It's a shame the Indians can't turn the term Redskin into an endearing term that their people can get behind, like the Yankees did.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
The Atlantic: "Democrats Really Are That Dense About Climate Change" (6/23/22 01:00 PST)
Replies
47
Views
1K
Maggot Brain
Maggot Brain
GordonGekko
Did "Canceling" Babylon Bee's Political Satire Change The Future Of All Social Media Forever? (6/5/22 12:30 PST)
Replies
18
Views
736
Juxtatarot
Juxtatarot
GordonGekko
New York Times: "Will Asian Americans Bolt From The Democratic Party?" (6/20/22 23:20 PST)
Replies
36
Views
876
jon_mx
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top