2014-2015 NFL Football thread

[Soxbadger]

Im not so sure what is controversial here. A trademark is not a right. The USPTO has broad discretion to deny any trademark. You can still use the term, you just cant sue people in Federal Court over their use using TM law. You still have other ways to sue them.

 

Even if the USPTO was to eliminate the logo TM (if there is one) the redskins could still have a copyright on it.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Soxbadger

[Jenksismyhero]

This is an interesting point, but I'm having a hard time believing you could walk up to a Native American, call him a redskin, and have him not be offended.

 

But the point is NO one does this.

[Jenksismyhero]

Well, Seminole is a specific term referring to an enumerable group of people. That group of people deserves every right to determine what are and aren't appropriate uses of their name. Sioux, Pueblo, Hopi, etc. tribes don't get a say in whether or not it's OK to use the Seminole name, even if the costume/rituals of the mascot aren't obviously different.

 

'Redskin' is a generic term referring to all Native Americans. If even a substantial minority of them have a problem with the name then it's an issue that needs to be addressed.

 

If you call someone a Midwestern Hick then as a Hoosier I can get offended. If you call someone a FIB I don't get offended because I'm not from Illinois.

 

I really doubt they polled every Seminole and asked them how they felt about it. More likely they talked to the governing board of the tribe, and once they were bought off, that was that.

 

What's FIB?

[Jenksismyhero]

Im not so sure what is controversial here. A trademark is not a right. The USPTO has broad discretion to deny any trademark. You can still use the term, you just cant sue people in Federal Court over their use using TM law. You still have other ways to sue them.

 

Even if the USPTO was to eliminate the logo TM (if there is one) the redskins could still have a copyright on it.

 

It's not that simple, and that's why the USPTO lost the first time they tried to do this.

[Soxbadger]

It's not that simple, and that's why the USPTO lost the first time they tried to do this.

 

Never said it was simple. Just there is no "right" to trademark.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

I was referring to this: "The USPTO has broad discretion to deny any trademark." They might, but at least in this area they've overstepped their bounds before.

[Soxbadger]

I was referring to this: "The USPTO has broad discretion to deny any trademark." They might, but at least in this area they've overstepped their bounds before.

 

They do have broad discretion. Never said who would win or lose, just that this isnt exactly earth shattering that the USPTO is saying a TM is no longer good. It happens all the time.

[bmags]

But the point is NO one does this.

 

Perhaps what hurts that group then, is with huge portions of the country that will never run into a modern Native American, the most iconic representation of their group of people is an ethnic slur harking back to the 19th century.

[zenryan]

I really doubt they polled every Seminole and asked them how they felt about it. More likely they talked to the governing board of the tribe, and once they were bought off, that was that.

 

What's FIB?

 

 

Pretty much this.

 

 

[zenryan]

The actual word 'redskin' carries a negative connotation whereas 'Indians' and 'Braves' do not. 'Seminoles' and 'Blackhawks' are named for specific tribes/people. There was actually a serious PC backlash against the name 'Seminoles' about a 15 or so years ago but then the Seminole tribe in Florida told everybody that they fully approve of the nickname and that everybody else had not right 'being offended' on their behalf, so that one is pretty much settled.

 

As for the Fighting Irish, well the liberals are never going to go to bat for white Catholics, so that name will probably be around forever.

 

 

The Indians were pretty much strong armed into getting rid of Chief Wahoo logo. What makes you think groups wont eventually turn their attention to the Blackhawks logo?

[farmteam]

I really doubt they polled every Seminole and asked them how they felt about it. More likely they talked to the governing board of the tribe, and once they were bought off, that was that.

 

What's FIB?

f***ing Illinois Bastard.

 

Never heard it til I went to IU. Apparently it's commonly used in Northwest Indiana, and to a lesser extent Southeastern Wisconsin.

[Jake]

This to me is a better argument for why censoring speech is dumb. Language changes. It doesn't mean the same thing over time. If stigma and connotation can be added over time, why can't it be lost too? Have you EVER heard of anyone refer to an american indian as a redskin? Nope, neither has anyone else still living. We all know it as a s***ty football team in Washington DC.

 

This isn't a matter of censorship, it's a matter of financial insulation. We have no interest as a society to help someone use a racial slur to make money

[LittleHurt05]

f***ing Illinois Bastard.

 

Never heard it til I went to IU. Apparently it's commonly used in Northwest Indiana, and to a lesser extent Southeastern Wisconsin.

 

I've heard it used plenty of times throughout the state of Wisconsin.

[Dick Allen]

I think the Redskins should change their name. If it is offensive, it is offensive. They aren't going to lose fans over a name change, and probably will make money on the new logo, not to mention the cache of old logo stuff that will become collector's items.

[southsider2k5]

f***ing Illinois Bastard.

 

Never heard it til I went to IU. Apparently it's commonly used in Northwest Indiana, and to a lesser extent Southeastern Wisconsin.

 

FIP is the big one in NWI.

[Quin]

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/r...n-indian-group/

 

Fun fact: Blackhawks are named after a guy, not a tribe.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hawk_(Sauk_leader)

[ChiSox_Sonix]

I think the Redskins should change their name. If it is offensive, it is offensive. They aren't going to lose fans over a name change, and probably will make money on the new logo, not to mention the cache of old logo stuff that will become collector's items.

 

Here's the problem: people take offense to f***ing everything nowadays. Does an American of Scandinavian descent have the right to take offense to the Vikings name and logo and ask that they change their name as well? What about a Mexican-American decrying the San Diego Aztecs? Or a Greek-American being upset about the Michigan State or SJSU Spartans? An Irishman over Notre Dame's Fighting Irish? A devout Catholic about the Saints? Etc...Where does it stop?

 

And the second bolded line, you don't know that. I certainly may have changed allegiance if I was a New Orleans Hornets fan. I still can't see the name Pelicans without laughing about it.

 

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/r...n-indian-group/

 

Fun fact: Blackhawks are named after a guy, not a tribe.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Hawk_(Sauk_leader)

 

This is a pretty well known fact, but the logo is what stands out. If the team were to argue they weren't named after a Native American tribe, then they really have nothing to stand on to defend the logo if they ever are attacked about it by the next self-righteous group who gets bored and needs something to do

[Jenksismyhero]

This isn't a matter of censorship, it's a matter of financial insulation. We have no interest as a society to help someone use a racial slur to make money

 

One and the same, regardless of the purpose.

[Jenksismyhero]

Here's the problem: people take offense to f***ing everything nowadays. Does an American of Scandinavian descent have the right to take offense to the Vikings name and logo and ask that they change their name as well? What about a Mexican-American decrying the San Diego Aztecs? Or a Greek-American being upset about the Michigan State or SJSU Spartans? An Irishman over Notre Dame's Fighting Irish? A devout Catholic about the Saints? Etc...Where does it stop?

 

Bingo, well said

[cabiness42]

Here's the problem: people take offense to f***ing everything nowadays. Does an American of Scandinavian descent have the right to take offense to the Vikings name and logo and ask that they change their name as well? What about a Mexican-American decrying the San Diego Aztecs? Or a Greek-American being upset about the Michigan State or SJSU Spartans? An Irishman over Notre Dame's Fighting Irish? A devout Catholic about the Saints? Etc...Where does it stop?

 

The big difference is that Viking, Aztec, Spartan, etc. were never derogatory terms, whereas Redskin is/was. Nobody is saying that you can't have a Native American mascot (Braves, Indians), you just can't use a derogatory word for it.

[ChiSox_Sonix]

The big difference is that Viking, Aztec, Spartan, etc. were never derogatory terms, whereas Redskin is/was. Nobody is saying that you can't have a Native American mascot (Braves, Indians), you just can't use a derogatory word for it.

 

Who's to say that the images/names of others aren't derogatory to some people? There's a pretty good argument that 'Fighting Irish' could be taken as a derogatory stereotype to the "drunken Irish brawler" of the early 20th century.

[GoSox05]

Wasn't the name "Fighting Irish" named be the Irish?

 

 

 

 

[bmags]

Wasn't the name "Fighting Irish" named be the Irish?

 

Sshhh, don't ruin their dream of equating a predominantly Irish Catholic universities mascot wildly popular with midwestern Irish families of being entirely the same as one of the most racist owners of the 20th century naming his team the Redskins.

[Dick Allen]

Here's the problem: people take offense to f***ing everything nowadays. Does an American of Scandinavian descent have the right to take offense to the Vikings name and logo and ask that they change their name as well? What about a Mexican-American decrying the San Diego Aztecs? Or a Greek-American being upset about the Michigan State or SJSU Spartans? An Irishman over Notre Dame's Fighting Irish? A devout Catholic about the Saints? Etc...Where does it stop?

 

And the second bolded line, you don't know that. I certainly may have changed allegiance if I was a New Orleans Hornets fan. I still can't see the name Pelicans without laughing about it.

 

 

 

This is a pretty well known fact, but the logo is what stands out. If the team were to argue they weren't named after a Native American tribe, then they really have nothing to stand on to defend the logo if they ever are attacked about it by the next self-righteous group who gets bored and needs something to do

Of course they do, but Redskins is a much different from the names you mentioned. For some reason, people were upset with the Chief in Champaign. He was eliminated. It didn't hurt Illinois athletics. How much of a bath did Marquette take changing their name? St. Johns used to be the Red Men. If a Redskins fan goes to another team because of the name, he or she wasn't much of a fan anyway. Unless we are American Indians, we probably don't know exactly how offensive the name is, but apparently many find it very offensive.

 

Is there really a huge amount of people that like the Redskins just because they are named the Redskins? I really doubt it.

[ptatc]

Of course they do, but Redskins is a much different from the names you mentioned. For some reason, people were upset with the Chief in Champaign. He was eliminated. It didn't hurt Illinois athletics. How much of a bath did Marquette take changing their name? St. Johns used to be the Red Men. If a Redskins fan goes to another team because of the name, he or she wasn't much of a fan anyway. Unless we are American Indians, we probably don't know exactly how offensive the name is, but apparently many find it very offensive.

 

Is there really a huge amount of people that like the Redskins just because they are named the Redskins? I really doubt it.

They lost all support from this graduate. And I'm sure it's really hurt them!