Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

ttabvue.uspto.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

#81

Post by tzs »

001sky wrote: post #65
rayiner wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not. The test for disparagement has two elements: 1) whether the mark singles out an identifiable group; and 2) whether a substantial composite of the group would find the mark disparaging. That is to say, the mark doesn't just have to be offensive to someone somewhere, but rather it has to be perceived as disparaging by a substantial portion of the particular group singled out by the mark. A good example of…

NWA will then surely lose (any of) its trademark rights?

They don't appear to have any registered trademarks.

There have been several attempts to register marks with "nigger", "nigga", "niggaz", and similar, but they all seem to have been abandoned [1]. Most of these were for things related to music (e.g., music production companies) or for clothing.

[1] One exception. There is an application for "Figgas over Niggas" that is still on track.

Re: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

#82

Post by neonhomer »

talmand wrote: post #69
dragonwriter wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally find it strange that the accepted term is "Native American" "Native American" isn't the accepted term so much as one of the more commonly accepted terms. > considering some of the treatment by Americans of the past and the fact they didn't name their land "America". Since Native Americans don't share a single pre-colonization language or name for the land, its not really surprising that one of the more…

It seems to be the accepted term amongst the most vocal on the subject. I understand why the term exists, I just don't understand its usage.

I think it should be termed Precursor Americans. At least that defines that they were present before it was title America.

Re: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

#83

Post by cylinder »

uptown wrote: post #2

An interesting visualization showing the land seized from Native Americans in the United States. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_vault/2014/06/17/interactive_...

Why has there been no native title movement like there was in Australia?

Re: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

#84

Post by blister »

retr0grad3 wrote: post #79
Shivetya wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We always ask them how they feel about Andrew Jackson, you know the guy on the twenty dollar bill? I am very sure he is more offensive than the football team. I assume we are only after sports teams because its easy to guilt the owners. Please have Cleveland get rid of their mascot

Hyperbole and incorrect facts ref. Cleveland. Cleveland's name is based on reference to the nickname for Joe Louis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Browns and the original owner wanted to name it after the coach Paul Brown.

He's talking about the baseball team, the Cleveland Indians, and the "Chief Wahoo" logo.

Re: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

#85

Post by rayiner »

dragonwriter wrote: post #63
rayiner wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not. The test for disparagement has two elements: 1) whether the mark singles out an identifiable group; and 2) whether a substantial composite of the group would find the mark disparaging. That is to say, the mark doesn't just have to be offensive to someone somewhere, but rather it has to be perceived as disparaging by a substantial portion of the particular group singled out by the mark. A good example of…

> The USPTO canceled the registration then, but the decision was overturned on appeal for insufficient evidence of disparagement. That was the initial reason, but later appeals threw out the claim based on an earlier threshold issue, that the claims were barred by laches. The present case is a fairly direct follow-on with younger plaintiffs specifically to negate the laches defense.

Thanks. I vaguely remembered the case from trademarks class, but that was a few years ago. :)

Re: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

#87

Post by TheCoelacanth »

deancognation wrote: post #86

This has been ruled on previously.....and previously overturned. So much for the trademarks office being a non-political office - https://www.facebook.com/LiveFootballChat/posts/101523093022...

It was overturned the first time because of laches, i.e. that the plaintiff had waited too long to bring the case. This time the plaintiff is someone who only recently turned 18, which negates the laches issue.

Re: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

#88

Post by 001sky »

tzs wrote: post #81
001sky wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NWA will then surely lose (any of) its trademark rights?

They don't appear to have any registered trademarks. There have been several attempts to register marks with "nigger", "nigga", "niggaz", and similar, but they all seem to have been abandoned [1]. Most of these were for things related to music (e.g., music production companies) or for clothing. [1] One exception. There is an application for "Figgas over Niggas" that is still on track.

Interestingly, the presumption appears to be positive in the statue absent the express carve out--which is essentially for "immorality" or "provocation".

U.S. Code › Title 15 › Chapter 22 › Subchapter I › § 1052 15 U.S. Code § 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

No trademark by which the goods of the applicant may be distinguished from the goods of others shall be refused registration on the principal register on account of its nature unless it—

(a) Consists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter; or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute;...

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1052*

Re: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Trademark For Redskins Football Team

#89

Post by 001sky »

bunderbunder wrote: post #35
jaxytee wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if these name controversies will lead to team Insignia issues. The team's name was based on a derogatory term, but their logo depicted a native american man that was drawn semi realistic. The Cleveland Indians literally use a cartoon caricature a Native American with red skin and a questionable facial expression: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cleveland_Indians_logo.svg

I only skimmed the ruling, but it sounds like this was not simply because they used American Indian imagery. It specifically discusses previous rulings along the lines of what you're suggesting, and explains why they chose not to cancel the trademark in that case, and why that precedent is not applicable in this case. Long story short, this isn't about simply using ethnic imagery. It's about using an out-and-out raci…

But that's a wrong-headed assumption. "Red-skin" is not a per-se slur, its a translation of a french phrase, and that was apparently derived from orginal native american usage. The latter referred to "white men" and "black men". Nobody is arguing that the native americans object to the french term "peau-rouge" ? or are they? Just curious on the data.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/peau#Etymology

Post reply on HN