Corrupt Liberal Assholes in US Government Force US Patent and Trademark Office to Cancel Washington Redskins Trademarks

Corrupt Liberal Assholes in US Government Force US Patent and Trademark Office to Cancel Washington Redskins Trademarks

Corrupt Liberal Assholes in US Government Force US Patent and Trademark Office to Cancel Washington Redskins Trademarks

Liberal assholes in our government have forced The United States Patent and Trademark Office to cancel six federal trademark registrations for the NFL’s Washington Redskins.

Fortunately, the cancellation of the trademarks does little to prevent the Washington Redskins from continuing to use the Washington Redskins name, something that is sure to make all of the liberal asshole senator’s blood boil – mostly Harry Reid.

I hope the Redskins fight this bullying by Democrats who are unhappy that Redskins owner Dan Snyder is a conservative who supports conservative causes, and fights for the right to keep their Washington Redskins trademarks.

Here are some trademarks that The United States Patent and Trademark Office has accepted, despite the fact that these trademarks would certainly reach the standard used for eliminating the Redskins trademarks.

  • Uppity Negro: Intended to be imprinted on mugs and apparel, this trademark references the frequently used adjective “uppity” to describe blacks who agitated for greater respect and civil rights in the Jim Crow-era South.
  • Cracka Azz Skateboards: Unsurprisingly, this trademark was taken out for a line of skateboards and longboards, as well as associated clothing such as bandannas. While the USPTO helpfully notes that “The wording ‘cracka azz’ has no meaning in a foreign language,” “cracka” is a slang version of “cracker,” which in this context is a term of derision for whites, used primarily within the black community.
  • Dago Swagg: A label created for a line of clothing. ”Dago” is a corruption of the common name Diego, and is used in English-speaking countries as an offensive term for those of Italian descent, and occasionally people from other Mediterranean countries as well.
  • Mammy Jamia’s: A company going by the name of A & S Cairns Limited has decided to attach its good name to an antebellum slur used to refer to an enslaved black woman who was in charge of household affairs, particularly caring for white children. The product? Frozen fruits and vegetables.

Once again, I hope the Redskins win a HUGE lawsuit over this abuse of power.

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has decided to cancel six federal trademark registrations that include the term “Redskins.” The ruling was made in relation to the longstanding use of the mark by the National Football League’s Washington Redskins. It was deemed that the use of “Redskins” by the NFL is disparaging of Native Americans, and thus the federally registered mark was effectively cancelled as of today. The implications of this ruling have been greatly exaggerated.

Today’s ruling will have “no effect at all on the team’s ownership of and right to use the Redskins name and logo.” That was the only emphasized and underlined portion of a statement by Bob Raskopf, trademark attorney for the Washington Redskins, which was released after the TTAB decision was announced. The Washington D.C.-based NFL team intends to appeal the TTAB’s decision cancelling the federal trademark registrations. More importantly, the team has recognized that it continues to own and is able to protect its marks without the registrations in place. The organization is correct.

ESPN.com Sports Business reporter Darren Rovell wrote, “[w]ithout protection, any fan can produce and sell Washington Redskins gear without having to pay the league or the team for royalties and wouldn’t be in violation of any law for doing so.” That is simply not true. The decision by the TTAB does not require the Washington D.C.-based NFL team to change its name, stop using the “Redskins” marks and it does not mean that the organization loses all legal rights in the marks. There are benefits to having a federal registration attached to an owned trademark, including but not limited to a legal presumption of ownership of the mark and the ability to bring an infringement action in federal court seeking statutory damages. Importantly, a lack of a federal registration in place does not equate to anarchy where any individual can create merchandise bearing “Redskins” marks and sell same in commerce.

If a sports fan decides to produce and sell Washington Redskins gear without obtaining advance permission from the team, and the gear creates a false representation that it originated from the NFL’s Washington Redskins organization, then that fan may be in violation of improperly benefiting from the use of the team’s common law protected trademark and be forced to pay damages related to the infringing use.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office makes the distinction between a federal registration in a trademark and common law rights quite clear. It says on its FAQ page, “Federal registration is not required to establish rights in a trademark. Common law rights arise from actual use of a mark…” The Washington Redskins organization has made it known that use of the Redskins name and logo will continue. There is little doubt in the public sphere as to a clear association between such marks and the NFL organization. Thus, whether the team prevails in appealing the cancellation of the federal registrations of the marks or not, it may still use such marks in commerce and prevent others from trying to benefit off of the use of same without consent.

Stand Up To Government Corruption and Hypocrisy – usbacklash.org