Washington football community discussions spanning the Redskins to Commanders era. 20+ years of game analysis, player discussions, and fan perspectives.
https://the-hogs.net/messageboard/
Washington Redstorms wrote:Since the Redskin name will be ending next season via Native Americans, what do you think about the new name?
Washington Redstorms!!
Washington Redstorms wrote:Since the Redskin name will be ending next season via Native Americans, what do you think about the new name?
Washington Redstorms!!
Washington Redstorms wrote:Since the Redskin name will be ending next season via Native Americans, what do you think about the new name?
Washington Redstorms!!
frankcal20 wrote:My personal feeling is that this is a tribute to Native Americans nothing derogatory. But I am not Native American so what do I know. But I know that I personally do not have any ill feelings toward Native Americans.
frankcal20 wrote:I wouldn't be surprised for us to see ... some kind of ruling banning all fan's from wearing team gear showing the name Redskins.
Bob 0119 wrote:Maybe we can keep the same logo and call it the Washington I-don't-have anything-better-to-do-with-my-time-than-try-and-extort-money-from-rich-corperations-by-suing-them-for-slander-when-no-offense-was-ever-intended's
But it seems a little lengthy.
Deadskins wrote:Bob 0119 wrote:Maybe we can keep the same logo and call it the Washington I-don't-have anything-better-to-do-with-my-time-than-try-and-extort-money-from-rich-corperations-by-suing-them-for-slander-when-no-offense-was-ever-intended's
But it seems a little lengthy.
You'd have trouble fitting that in the endzone.
Washington Redstorms wrote:Since the Redskin name will be ending next season via Native Americans, what do you think about the new name?
Washington Redstorms!!
Washington Redstorms wrote:Since the Redskin name will be ending next season via Native Americans, what do you think about the new name?
Washington Redstorms!!
riggofan wrote:I think they're trying to get the Supreme Court to hear that case now, right?
I wouldn't worry too much about needing to change the name though. Whether a few people are offended by the name or not, we do have freedom of speech in this country.
I wouldn't mind seeing the skins get rid of the indian on their helmet and go back to the spear again though!
frankcal20 wrote:I thought that our major defense was that we have backing of several major tribes that our team name is in fact a tribute to Native American's. But I wouldn't be surprised for us to see the name change and some kind of ruling banning all fan's from wearing team gear showing the name Redskins.
SnyderSucks wrote:frankcal20 wrote:I thought that our major defense was that we have backing of several major tribes that our team name is in fact a tribute to Native American's. But I wouldn't be surprised for us to see the name change and some kind of ruling banning all fan's from wearing team gear showing the name Redskins.
The only defense in the current case is essentially the statute of limitations. The lower courts have issued conflicting rulings about whether the plaintiffs waited too long. Even if the Supreme Court rules that the statute of limitations had expired for the current plaintiffs, they can get someone younger to file the same case and likely win. The statute of limitations does not start until the person who eventually files the case turns 18.
If the team loses the case, there is no ban on the name or anything like that. They could continue using the name forever, if they wanted to do so. They would lose their copyright on the name, meaning that anyone could use the name and logo without paying the team. So, they would change the name in order to keep a copyright.
frankcal20 wrote:I thought that our major defense was that we have backing of several major tribes that our team name is in fact a tribute to Native American's. But I wouldn't be surprised for us to see the name change and some kind of ruling banning all fan's from wearing team gear showing the name Redskins.
My personal feeling is that this is a tribute to Native Americans nothing derogatory. But I am not Native American so what do I know. But I know that I personally do not have any ill feelings toward Native Americans.
Bob 0119 wrote:SnyderSucks wrote:frankcal20 wrote:I thought that our major defense was that we have backing of several major tribes that our team name is in fact a tribute to Native American's. But I wouldn't be surprised for us to see the name change and some kind of ruling banning all fan's from wearing team gear showing the name Redskins.
The only defense in the current case is essentially the statute of limitations. The lower courts have issued conflicting rulings about whether the plaintiffs waited too long. Even if the Supreme Court rules that the statute of limitations had expired for the current plaintiffs, they can get someone younger to file the same case and likely win. The statute of limitations does not start until the person who eventually files the case turns 18.
If the team loses the case, there is no ban on the name or anything like that. They could continue using the name forever, if they wanted to do so. They would lose their copyright on the name, meaning that anyone could use the name and logo without paying the team. So, they would change the name in order to keep a copyright.
But aren't the Redskins one of the few teams that have a copyright on their name and logo. I think the rest are owned by the league.
SnyderSucks wrote:frankcal20 wrote:I thought that our major defense was that we have backing of several major tribes that our team name is in fact a tribute to Native American's. But I wouldn't be surprised for us to see the name change and some kind of ruling banning all fan's from wearing team gear showing the name Redskins.
The only defense in the current case is essentially the statute of limitations. The lower courts have issued conflicting rulings about whether the plaintiffs waited too long. Even if the Supreme Court rules that the statute of limitations had expired for the current plaintiffs, they can get someone younger to file the same case and likely win. The statute of limitations does not start until the person who eventually files the case turns 18.
If the team loses the case, there is no ban on the name or anything like that. They could continue using the name forever, if they wanted to do so. They would lose their copyright on the name, meaning that anyone could use the name and logo without paying the team. So, they would change the name in order to keep a copyright.
Laches Proves To Be the Most Valuable Player: In Pro Football Inc. v. Harjo, several American Indians were challenging the validity of the Washington Redskins trademark on the ground that it was "disparaging," which trademarks aren't allowed to be. (The federal trademark statute provides that, among other things, marks generally aren't allowed when, among other things, they "[c]onsist[] of or comprise[] 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.") If the plaintiffs had won, that wouldn't have legally barred the trademark owners from using the mark; but it would have stripped the owners of some of the legal rights they'd have to police the mark against infringers, and thus would have given the owners some incentive to switch to a fully legally protected mark.
The trouble is that the challengers apparently waited for a long time in bringing the lawsuit, which triggers "laches, an equitable defense that applies where there is “(1) lack of diligence by the party against whom the defense is asserted, and (2) prejudice to the party asserting the defense.”" The district court held in Pro-Football's favor, and the D.C. Circuit just affirmed.
Other American Indians who just turned 18 could still bring the same substantive claim, since they would not have exhibited any "lack of diligence." Still, this is a pretty big victory for Pro Football. Even if it has only delayed the possible cancellation of the mark -- not at all clear, since they might eventually win on the merits -- it has gotten many extra years during which to exploit it (and I take it that the league's judgment in defending this lawsuit has been that the Redskins mark is much more valuable, at least right now, than any replacement mark would be).