News

Redskins to fight trademark ban

Redskins to fight trademark ban

WHAT'S IN A NAME?:On Wednesday, a U.S. Patent and Trademark Office tribunal canceled six Redskins trademarks because they disparage Native Americans. Photo: Associated Press

By Ian Simpson

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Washington Redskins expect a legal case involving cancellation of the NFL team’s trademarks to move more quickly than a previous case that took nearly 11 years to conclude in the franchise’s favor, a lawyer for the team said on Thursday.

On Wednesday, a U.S. Patent and Trademark Office tribunal canceled six Redskins trademarks because they disparage Native Americans. The team has said it will appeal the ruling in federal court, and the trademark protection remains until appeals are concluded.

The team’s trademark lawyer, Bob Raskopf, told Reuters the case would likely be resolved more quickly than the previous one involving a 1999 Patent Office tribunal ruling since the appeal would be heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia rather than in a Washington court.

“It’s known for the speedier resolutions. It’s called the ‘rocket docket.’ … They move cases quickly,” Raskopf said.

The previous case took almost 11 years to conclude until the Supreme Court declined to hear it in 2009, with the Redskins retaining their trademark protection.

Citing tradition, team owner Daniel Snyder for 14 years has defied calls to change the club’s name, which dates from the 1930s. The Redskins have come under increasing pressure from Native American groups, politicians and others over the name.

Raskopf said he had talked with Snyder about an appeal and he is “as optimistic as I am.”

The team wanted to win the case, Blackhorse v Pro Football Inc., on the merits so the issue of the name can finally be resolved, he said.

The earlier case was decided on a technical issue, with a District of Columbia court ruling that the petitioners had waited too long to assert their rights as adults after the first Redskins’ trademark was issued in 1967.

Raskopf said he was confident since the arguments in the current case were the same as that in the 1999 case. The three-member tribunal board also had split, adding to his optimism, he said.

Amanda Blackhorse, the named plaintiff in the case, said increasing public opposition to the Redskins’ name would help during the appeals process.

Redskins “is a term that has been created for us by the colonizers. They use that word to oppress us,” Blackhorse, a Navajo psychiatric social worker, told Reuters.

(Reporting by Ian Simpson; Editing by Eric Beech and Will Dunham)

Recent Headlines

17 hours ago in Local

SD Legislators Attempting to Deal with Trans-Gender Issues

District 18 forum 020616

The South Dakota House last week approved HB1008, a bill that would restrict trans-gender students’ access to bathrooms in public schools, by a margin of 58 to 10.

17 hours ago in Local

SD Legislators Get First Look at Sales Tax Bill

Jean Hunhoff 020816

The bill containing the Governors funding plan for teacher pay and increased sales taxes will be up for debate in a South Dakota House committee today.

1 day ago in Local

Improvements Needed in Minnesota Child Protection Laws

kids1

The State of Minnesota must continue to press for 24/7 response to child abuse reports in all 87 counties -

1 day ago in Local

Iowa Auditor Finds Misspent Unemployment Funds

dollar sign approved clipart 1

A report from State Auditor Mary Mosiman finds Iowa Workforce Development paid out more than 909-thousand dollars in unemployment benefits that should not have been paid.

1 day ago in Local

Iowa Legislators Disagree over Medicaid Changes

medical file

Democrats in the Iowa Senate plan to pass a bill that would stop Governor Branstad's plan to move the 560-thousand Medicaid patients in Iowa into private managed care plans.