Page 23 of 38 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast
Results 441 to 460 of 742

Thread: Redskins Lose Trademark on Redskin Name: It's "Disparaging"

  1. #441
    BTW, getting back on-topic here :

    Will Snyder now *have to* change the name or can he just say F.U. to them and keep it?

  2. #442
    Highest Negative Rep
    In JetsInsider History

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    No, just whether he can register those marks for Federal trademark protection.

    Which, you know, is all that they decided.

    So, seriously, what the hell are you babbling about?
    What I'm pointing out is that this has nothing to to with the PTO. They are powerless. Withholding a trademark means nothing because no one else is being assigned the trademark so the Washington Redskins wouldn't be held liable for infringing anything. The only pain point, and its incredibly minor, is that others could knock off the Redskins trade dress at will. I'm sure the proud fans would boycott knockoffs to support their valiant owner anyway.

    We are all very happy that you're an expert on Patents. This isn't about Patents. So you can be quiet now.

    SAR I

  3. #443
    Quote Originally Posted by shakin318 View Post
    It hasn't been underfunded. It's been grossly and fraudulently mismanaged. Interesting article on it just yesterday: http://patriotpost.us/opinion/26732

    Underfunded, fraud..all the same. You think this is new? It's been this way since the Revolutionary War I suspect. Again, I went through 30 years ago and it was a disgrace. Nothing's changed. Nobody really gives a **** unless they can bash the other party over the head with it.

    In fact, in 1783, a group of Vets took congress hostage for trying to get their pensions....they were sentenced to death (later commuted).
    Last edited by CleatMarks; 06-19-2014 at 08:11 PM.

  4. #444
    Highest Negative Rep
    In JetsInsider History

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vin View Post
    BTW, getting back on-topic here :

    Will Snyder now *have to* change the name or can he just say F.U. to them and keep it?
    He can keep it forever, there is nothing that would prevent him from re-naming something he owns.

    This nonsense from the Patent & Trademark Office is a joke, the vote was 2-1 in favor of rescinding the rights to the name "Redskins" which has belonged to Snyder's property for 70 years. This is the third or fourth time this has happened, every time a higher authority tells the PTO they are idiots and they reinstate the marks.

    SAR I

  5. #445
    Quote Originally Posted by SAR I View Post
    He can keep it forever, there is nothing that would prevent him from re-naming something he owns.

    This nonsense from the Patent & Trademark Office is a joke, the vote was 2-1 in favor of rescinding the rights to the name "Redskins" which has belonged to Snyder's property for 70 years. This is the third or fourth time this has happened, every time a higher authority tells the PTO they are idiots and they reinstate the marks.

    SAR I
    So if that's the case, then this should soon make it the FIFTH time a higher authority tells the PTO they're idiots and reinstate the marks.

  6. #446
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Manalapan, NJ/Boca Raton, Fl
    Posts
    15,569
    Quote Originally Posted by Vin View Post
    So if that's the case, then this should soon make it the FIFTH time a higher authority tells the PTO they're idiots and reinstate the marks.
    And if losing the trademark was so worthless why do the Redskins keep appealing the decision, spending millions to get it reversed?

  7. #447
    Quote Originally Posted by Jet Nut View Post
    And if losing the trademark was so worthless why do the Redskins keep appealing the decision, spending millions to get it reversed?
    Well, they probably generate a shlt ton of money on it.

  8. #448
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman Harris View Post
    Well, they probably generate a shlt ton of money on it.
    The Point.

    You get it.

  9. #449
    Might not be a bad idea to invest in some "Redskins" gear... They may end up collectible and worth a bunch, like the Hernandez jersey.

  10. #450
    Quote Originally Posted by SAR I View Post
    He can keep it forever, there is nothing that would prevent him from re-naming something he owns.

    This nonsense from the Patent & Trademark Office is a joke, the vote was 2-1 in favor of rescinding the rights to the name "Redskins" which has belonged to Snyder's property for 70 years. This is the third or fourth time this has happened, every time a higher authority tells the PTO they are idiots and they reinstate the marks.

    SAR I
    Lol. It's the second time, and the first wasn't reversed on the merits.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

  11. #451
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman Harris View Post
    Might not be a bad idea to invest in some "Redskins" gear... They may end up collectible and worth a bunch, like the Hernandez jersey.
    I would think they'd be worth a bit more than a dollar, wouldn't you say?

  12. #452
    Quote Originally Posted by Vin View Post
    I would think they'd be worth a bit more than a dollar, wouldn't you say?
    I dunno, those A-Hern jerseys were going for big bucks last I heard.

  13. #453
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Thornwood, NY
    Posts
    5,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman Harris View Post
    I dunno, those A-Hern jerseys were going for big bucks last I heard.
    What's the going rate on those 19-0 tee-shirts?

  14. #454
    Quote Originally Posted by nycdan View Post
    What's the going rate on those 19-0 tee-shirts?
    Cost of an airline ticket to Africa or Ethiopia.

  15. #455
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Posts
    5,668
    i hate this politically correct super sensitive ****ry. we are living in...

  16. #456
    Bewildered Beast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF via Strong Island
    Posts
    30,752
    Quote Originally Posted by jetswin View Post


    where's the outrage?
    This is nothing to Jim Crow about.

  17. #457
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,169
    Quote Originally Posted by jetswin View Post


    where's the outrage?
    The corporation's marketing material describes Red Man's consumer base: "A large number of consumers work outdoors and enjoy hunting, fishing and watch [sic] auto racing."

    Sounds like a group destined for empathic outrage, all right.

    P.S. I'm guessing this trademark is in trouble as well.

  18. #458
    Quote Originally Posted by long island leprechaun View Post
    The corporation's marketing material describes Red Man's consumer base: "A large number of consumers work outdoors and enjoy hunting, fishing and watch [sic] auto racing."

    Sounds like a group destined for empathic outrage, all right.

    P.S. I'm guessing this trademark is in trouble as well.

    Exactly. That's how this stuff works. You go after the big guy to set up precedent and all the dominos fall once that succeed. I suspect they, and companies like them, are watching this closely and forming a plan as we speak. Once you lose your trademark, you lose your brand identity. You aren't protected by any kind of infringement of that trademark.

    The NFL lawyers are working overtime I suspect. The Redskins trademark is part of the NFL brand so this affects them.

  19. #459
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman Harris View Post
    Well, they probably generate a shlt ton of money on it.
    Im no expert but this decision represents a lot of lost revenue to the Redskins and the NFL... w/o the trademark, every Tom, Dick and Chong (see what I did there?) can legally put the Redskins logo on anything, amirite?

    Doesnt mean the team has to change the name at all - but it would be in their financial interests to do so if the decision stands?

  20. #460
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooklyn Jet View Post
    Im no expert but this decision represents a lot of lost revenue to the Redskins and the NFL... w/o the trademark, every Tom, Dick and Chong (see what I did there?) can legally put the Redskins logo on anything, amirite?

    Doesnt mean the team has to change the name at all - but it would be in their financial interests to do so if the decision stands?
    I'd guess so... Only thing I'd be worried about is if it gets reinstated and you have a whole bounty of merch, you prob can't sling it anymore. (legally)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us