Red Mosquito

I'm cutting this one off at the pass with its own thread so as not to disturb football discussion in the main Redskins thread or other NFL threads.

Anyway, the news making the rounds right now is that the US Patent Office cancelled some of the Skins' trademarks today. Here's the ruling:

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno= ... AN&eno=199

The key question that I've yet to see a satisfactory answer on this, however, is whether this has any impact on the current logo, color scheme, or anything else associated with the Redskins. If it doesn't (and reading the ruling, I don't think it does), I don't see how this will practically stop Dan Snyder from the ability to exclusively sell Redskins merchandise, which is the goal of this fight in the first place. Sure, maybe you could distribute T-shirts with just the Redskins name, but if you can't include the logo as well, it's pretty meaningless.

just change the name to the washington pigskins. everybody can still call them "the skins" without offending anyone anymore. except pigs, i guess.

spike wrote:just change the name to the washington pigskins. everybody can still call them "the skins" without offending anyone anymore. except pigs, i guess.

"Well, football's not really my thing. After all, what kind of civilized person would play a game with the skin of an innocent pig?"

Though, I don't think the Hogs would be disappointed with that kind of change.

Green Habit wrote:I'm cutting this one off at the pass with its own thread so as not to disturb football discussion in the main Redskins thread or other NFL threads.

Anyway, the news making the rounds right now is that the US Patent Office cancelled some of the Skins' trademarks today. Here's the ruling:

http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?pno= ... AN&eno=199

The key question that I've yet to see a satisfactory answer on this, however, is whether this has any impact on the current logo, color scheme, or anything else associated with the Redskins. If it doesn't (and reading the ruling, I don't think it does), I don't see how this will practically stop Dan Snyder from the ability to exclusively sell Redskins merchandise, which is the goal of this fight in the first place. Sure, maybe you could distribute T-shirts with just the Redskins name, but if you can't include the logo as well, it's pretty meaningless.

Basically, the team will appeal, which will allow them to still sell all manners of shit with the logo while the appeal is in process

They'd be better off just changing the name now and avoiding all of this horseshit

MattA75 wrote:Basically, the team will appeal, which will allow them to still sell all manners of shit with the logo while the appeal is in process

But even if they lose the appeal, I don't see how it means anything in the end if only the name is unprotected. Most Redskins fans are going to want the whole deal (logo, colors, etc.).

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out and how it affects the other professional teams in similar situations. The Cleveland Indians have already pretty much phased out their unbelievably racist Chief Wahoo logo, and the Chicago Blackhawks don't seem to receive nearly the same amount of flak for their name/logo.

Green Habit wrote:

MattA75 wrote:Basically, the team will appeal, which will allow them to still sell all manners of shit with the logo while the appeal is in process

But even if they lose the appeal, I don't see how it means anything in the end if only the name is unprotected. Most Redskins fans are going to want the whole deal (logo, colors, etc.).

NPR today made it sound like the logo itself wasn't exclusive to the team anymore. They could be wrong though, or I could have misheard it.

philpritchard wrote:It'll be interesting to see how this plays out and how it affects the other professional teams in similar situations. The Cleveland Indians have already pretty much phased out their unbelievably racist Chief Wahoo logo, and the Chicago Blackhawks don't seem to receive nearly the same amount of flak for their name/logo.

The Indians seem to have done a good job launching a preemptive strike against Chief Wahoo to avoid entering a circle of PR hell.

Green Habit wrote:

philpritchard wrote:It'll be interesting to see how this plays out and how it affects the other professional teams in similar situations. The Cleveland Indians have already pretty much phased out their unbelievably racist Chief Wahoo logo, and the Chicago Blackhawks don't seem to receive nearly the same amount of flak for their name/logo.

The Indians seem to have done a good job launching a preemptive strike against Chief Wahoo to avoid entering a circle of PR hell.

Someone needs to tell this guy:

philpritchard wrote:Someone needs to tell this guy:

Wow.

If it were up to me i would change them all.

We're talking about a freaking sports mascot.

One, the history of that mascot is not important. Two it doesn't harm a team to change it because several teams have done that before due to changing cities what have you

It trivializes a group of people and that's wrong whether or not you find it racist.

Change all of the names.

Electromatic wrote:If it were up to me is change them all.

We're talking about a freaking sports mascot.

One, the history of that mascot is not important it doesn't harm a team to change it because several teams have done

It trivializes a group of people and that's wrong whether or not you find it racist.

Change all of the names.

So you're saying we should...give em the chop?

Chud, if you were asked to rename all four Boston-area teams, what would you name them?

Only one of them is allowed to be named the Boston Chuds.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Electromatic wrote:If it were up to me is change them all.

We're talking about a freaking sports mascot.

One, the history of that mascot is not important it doesn't harm a team to change it because several teams have done

It trivializes a group of people and that's wrong whether or not you find it racist.

Change all of the names.

So you're saying we should...give em the chop?

I say do it!

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Electromatic wrote:If it were up to me is change them all.

We're talking about a freaking sports mascot.

One, the history of that mascot is not important it doesn't harm a team to change it because several teams have done

It trivializes a group of people and that's wrong whether or not you find it racist.

Change all of the names.

So you're saying we should...give em the chop?

sure take it.

How the hell the Cleveland Indians continue to use their screaming native american logo is beyond me.

Oh, and the native american on the white horse with a flaming spear representing the state university of Florida.

And the crazy dancing native american in Champaign, Illinois.

I'm sure there are more.

Chris_H_2 wrote:How the hell the Cleveland Indians continue to use their screaming native american logo is beyond me.

Oh, and the native american on the white horse with a flaming spear representing the state university of Florida.

And the crazy dancing native american in Champaign, Illinois.

I'm sure there are more.

Isn't FSU on good terms with the Seminole Tribe, though?

I have no idea on the same for the Illini, though.

FSU has the permission of several high ranking members of the Seminole Tribe of Florida. However, the majority of Seminole descendants were/are outside of Florida (mostly in Oklahoma), and there's a lot of opposition to the use of the name among them.

Green Habit wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:How the hell the Cleveland Indians continue to use their screaming native american logo is beyond me.

Oh, and the native american on the white horse with a flaming spear representing the state university of Florida.

And the crazy dancing native american in Champaign, Illinois.

I'm sure there are more.

Isn't FSU on good terms with the Seminole Tribe, though?

I have no idea on the same for the Illini, though.

Seminole isn't used as a disparaging term, either.