U.S. Patent office cancels Redskins trademark registration

[Neely2005]

U.S. Patent office cancels Redskins trademark registration:

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Football/N.../21749026.html

[T-Bone]

One down, one to go:
yesmerced-210947.jpg

[shayman]

One down, one to go:
Attachment 468

One more to go. "Edmonton Eskimos."

[T-Bone]

One more to go. "Edmonton Eskimos."

I realized that after I responded. Correction: One down, two to go. That I know of.

[hugoagogo]

One more to go. "Edmonton Eskimos."

Just call us Esks then. Actually the term Eskimo traditionally refers to a wide range of peoples on multiple continents, not just the Inuit. I've never heard of an official protest by those that might, but I'd hate to see my team have to change its name. I guess the one thing working in our favour is our logo in no way reinforces what some might consider offensive. Unlike the Redskins and Braves.

[argonaut11xx]

People are too thin skinned these days....nothing wrong with any of the nicknames...and thats just this "honkys" opinion..and apparently the commish of the nfl as well.

Goodell spelled out the NFL's position.
"The Washington Redskins name has thus from its origin represented a positive meaning distinct from any disparagement that could be viewed in some other context," writes Goodell. "For the team's millions of fans and customers, who represent one of America's most ethnically and geographically diverse fan bases, the name is a unifying force that stands for strength, courage, pride and respect.

[shayman]

People are too thin skinned these days....nothing wrong with any of the nicknames...and thats just this "honkys" opinion..and apparently the commish of the nfl as well.

The thing is, you don't get to decide if other people are offended or if your speech is offensive. It's not your call.

It took me a while to realize this growing up, but you should call people what they want to be called, not what you think they should be called.

[hugoagogo]

The thing is, you don't get to decide if other people are offended or if your speech is offensive. It's not your call.
It took me a while to realize this growing up, but you should call people what they want to be called, not what you think they should be called.

Gotta agree. As much as I love my football team, if they were ever approached by the community of people that are offended by the name, I know the club (especially a "community owned" one) would make every effort to do the right thing. It's not my call. But dammit, I don't wanna have to be called the GREENGOLDS

[argonaut11xx]

The "Politically" Correct CFL.
1) The Montreal "Trudeau's" (for Pierre)
2) The Ottawa "Trudeaus's" (for Justin) - It wouldnt be the CFL if we didnt have 2 teams with the same nickname
3) The Toronto "Layton's"
4) The Hamilton "Copp's"
5) The Winnipeg "Riel's"
6) The Saskatchewan "Tommy's"
7) The Edmonton "Stop The Oil Sand's"
8) The Calgary " No Pipelines"
9) The BC "Suzuki's"

Hell, why not re-name the Washington Redskins, the Washington "Baracks"

[ArgoRavi]

It doesn't have anything to do with political correctness; it has everything to do with basic respect.

[T-Bone]

[LLB997]

eskimos, not even in the same league as redskins as far as offensive names go AINEC. The fighting irish name and logo and Blackhawks name and logo is more offensive imo. this is the issue here. where do we start, where do we end?? Canadiens? Canucks? Packers? Redblacks? Warriors?

[paulwoods13]

People are too thin skinned these days....nothing wrong with any of the nicknames...and thats just this "honkys" opinion..and apparently the commish of the nfl as well.

Goodell spelled out the NFL's position.
"The Washington Redskins name has thus from its origin represented a positive meaning distinct from any disparagement that could be viewed in some other context," writes Goodell. "For the team's millions of fans and customers, who represent one of America's most ethnically and geographically diverse fan bases, the name is a unifying force that stands for strength, courage, pride and respect.

Thank you for reminding me why I once had you banned from my feed.

[argonaut11xx]

http://nfl.si.com/2014/01/31/roger-g...redskins-name/

[T-Bone]

eskimos, not even in the same league as redskins as far as offensive names go AINEC. The fighting irish name and logo and Blackhawks name and logo is more offensive imo. this is the issue here. where do we start, where do we end?? Canadiens? Canucks? Packers? Redblacks? Warriors?

That is not the issue here. Do you seriously not understand the differences?

Gotta agree. As much as I love my football team, if they were ever approached by the community of people that are offended by the name, I know the club (especially a "community owned" one) would make every effort to do the right thing. It's not my call. But dammit, I don't wanna have to be called the GREENGOLDS

That is what it comes down to. If there are natives that are offended by the name like the case with the Washington Redskins then a change should be made. Like you said earlier there is nothing wrong with the logo so a new "E" name would correct the issue.

Washington Redskins fight could put pressure on Edmonton Eskimos

Roger Goodell says ‘Nine of 10 Native Americans support the Redskins’ name’

I wonder how much research Goodell did to come up with that stat. Ultimately, Washington can keep the name but the government has decided they are not going to protect it for them anymore. I'm sure they will be appealing the decision, which means the name and logo will still be protected until after the appeal is complete.

[D-Gap-Willie]

That is not the issue here. Do you seriously not understand the differences?

I'm sorry but that is, at least in part, the issue here, since a group of 'native Americans' have chosen to make the Washington Redskins their sole target. They have not targeted the Braves, the Indians, the Chiefs, the Eskimos, the Blackhawks or any others with 'racially' derived/derogatory names. Are those next ? Why have they chosen to target the Redskins ? The Indian's logo is far more demeaning. The Brave's tomahawk chop is extremely demeaning. Yet for some reason they have chosen the Redskins, whose name while derogatory in present usage, was invented by the native Americans themselves, and first translated by the French as peau-rouge.

For much of history, native Americans used the terms red skin and white skin freely, and not always with malice and hatred. Be that as it may, many in today's society deem the term to be derogatory and offensive. We have no idea of the size this group of "many", but we do know that they are highly vocal and have focussed their venom on the Redskins. In 1999, an almost identical trademark decision was rendered by the courts in the USA, but it was overturned on appeal shortly thereafter. In 2006, a new native American group initiated the present case. Will this decision also be overturned ?

The question is not whether the name is offensive or not - it is offensive to some people. The question is twofold. Is the offended group sincerely offended by the name, or only trying to establish a legal landmark to continue the campaign against any and all such names? Secondly, and equally important is whether the Redskins have used the name in an offensive and derogatory manner. Any other other comments ( thank you Mr Obama) serve to only politicise and sensationalise an already overblown story.

[shayman]

I'm sorry but that is, at least in part, the issue here, since a group of 'native Americans' have chosen to make the Washington Redskins their sole target. They have not targeted the Braves, the Indians, the Chiefs, the Eskimos, the Blackhawks or any others with 'racially' derived/derogatory names. Are those next ? Why have they chosen to target the Redskins ?

I would bet the other inappropriate names will change eventually. But "Redskins" is off-the-chart the worst. Directly calling out the colour of someone's skin? In 2014? Have we learned nothing from the civil rights movement in the past fifty years? I hope we are living in a more enlightened era now than when those teams were all named.

The Washington Redskins are hardly the only ones targeted. Lots of colleges have already changed their team names from "Indians" or "Redskins". for instance....

Stanford Indians (changed to Cardinal in 1972)
Dartmouth Indians (Big Green, 1974)
Siena Indians (Saints, 1988)
Miami (Ohio) Redskins (RedHawks, 1997)
Louisiana-Monroe Indians (Warhawks, 2006)
Arkansas State Indians (Red Wolves, 2008)

[Mulder]

That is what it comes down to. If there are natives that are offended by the name like the case with the Washington Redskins then a change should be made. Like you said earlier there is nothing wrong with the logo so a new "E" name would correct the issue.

Washington Redskins fight could put pressure on Edmonton Eskimos

Correct the issue?

Welcome to a world where a very small minority get their way.

Inuit don't refer to themselves as Eskimos, & the Edmonton predates any racism surrounding the Inuit.
And unlike the term RedSkins, the term Eskimos actually has Inuit/native translations/origins.
So we have "snowshoe-netter" or "to make showshoes" - hardly offensive
Or as one Cree put it "It could have come from 'askamiciw'" Which means "Eater of Raw meat" For which, in Cree Text's this word is used alot to refer to other native populations, so I guess they were racists too. (there really isn't alot of documentation on the origins).

But hey, if we are going to bad the term "Eats Raw meat" time to ban the Ticat Chant too. I hear they love to eat em raw.

[Will]

MT .@strombo: W/ pressure mounting on Washington Football.... Will Cdns. apply equal pressure to Edmonton Football Club?" #CFL #Esks

— CFL News (@CFL_News) June 19, 2014

[D-Gap-Willie]

I would bet the other inappropriate names will change eventually. But "Redskins" is off-the-chart the worst. Directly calling out the colour of someone's skin? In 2014? Have we learned nothing from the civil rights movement in the past fifty years? I hope we are living in a more enlightened era now than when those teams were all named.

The Washington Redskins are hardly the only ones targeted. Lots of colleges have already changed their team names from "Indians" or "Redskins". for instance....

Stanford Indians (changed to Cardinal in 1972)
Dartmouth Indians (Big Green, 1974)
Siena Indians (Saints, 1988)
Miami (Ohio) Redskins (RedHawks, 1997)
Louisiana-Monroe Indians (Warhawks, 2006)
Arkansas State Indians (Red Wolves, 2008)

Just for the record, I have been a Redskin fan since the 1950's, growing up in northern Virginia. I never thought of the name as being offensive until the court trademark decision of 1999. Nothing in the Redskin's operation has ever done anything to demean native Americans, but rather has glorified native Americans. I am aware of the many college name changes, particularly since i played for the William & Mary Indians, now the Tribe; these changes were largely brought about somewhat voluntarily. I say "somewhat", since there is always the background threat of "conform or you will be sterilized" which comes from the "the civil rights movement in the past fifty years" . Yes, we have indeed learned from the civil rights movement - just ask Donald Sterling.

As I said in my earlier post, redskin is a term invented by native Americans themselves, and has only recently come to be deemed offensive.

Being known by the color of your skin is for me no big deal. Living in China for 2 years, I was frequently addressed as " gwailo " which means white skin. For me, no problem - I have white skin.