Comments on: PTO cancels Washington Redskins trademark as disparaging

By: RRBILL

RRBILL — Sun, 22 Jun 2014 21:29:30 +0000

My former employer, the University of North Dakota has no nicknames whatsoever, because the Fighting Sioux was considered to be offsensive to one of the three bands of Dakota (Sioux) Native Americans within the state. They are now the UND Football Players.

By: The Redskins trademark and agency discretion - Overlawyered

The Redskins trademark and agency discretion - Overlawyered — Sun, 22 Jun 2014 20:00:03 +0000

[…] here and […]

By: Parkhorse

Parkhorse — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 17:29:00 +0000

Christians should be offended by the team name of the Detroit Lions. Everyone else, by their performance.

By: New Cato podcast on Washington Redskins trademark ruling - Overlawyered

New Cato podcast on Washington Redskins trademark ruling - Overlawyered — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 04:30:15 +0000

[…] Why should trademark law ban “disparagement” in first place? Caleb Brown interviews me on the Washington Redskins case for the Cato Daily Podcast. Earlier here. […]

By: Proofreader

Proofreader — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 03:12:41 +0000

I think it is a terrible situation when politicians go after the Washington football team when an even more insidious menace is being forged in baseball. Aren’t they concerned about the Communist team playing in the National League? These fellow travelers make no attempt to hide their alliance. They actually proudly call themselves the Cincinnati Reds. Shouldn’t the House UnAmerican Activities Committee be looking into their nefarious activities?

By: US Patent Office Invalidates Washington Redskins Trademark. | Raised On Hoecakes

Thu, 19 Jun 2014 09:54:02 +0000

[…] commenter on the Overlawyered thread […]

By: SmallGovernmentGuy

SmallGovernmentGuy — Thu, 19 Jun 2014 04:32:38 +0000

More evidence that government is out of control.

By: John Fembup

John Fembup — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:56:18 +0000

PETA could object to the exploitation of animals – lions, Tigers, and Bears, oh my! And Bluejays, Hawks, Cardinals . . .

This is all a national disgrace that we must deal with before we can face the economy and threats from terrorists with integrity and resolve.

By: ras

ras — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:43:19 +0000

Is the name “Democrat” offensive if a significant number of people are offended by their undemocratic policies? What about those who think Republicans no longer uphold republicanism?

In the meantime, all hail the Washington Denial.

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:38:02 +0000

I just don’t get it. The name may be in poor taste, but what business is it of the USPTO?

If, for example, the majority of people in same sex marriages find the name “National Organization for Marriage” disparaging, would the USPTO cancel their trademarks?

Or if the majority of Jews find the name “Jews for Jesus” disparaging and misleading can we expect the USPTO to cancel their trademark?

Or people who believe in our Jury system and the Rule of Law to meet out justice may find the “Justice for Trayvon” trademark disparaging! I think I’ll write a letter to the USPTO right away.

This seems outrageous and unprecedented to me.