Skip to comments.
U.S. Trademark Office Says ‘Redskins’ is Derogatory
CBS Washington D.C. ^
| January 7th, 2014
| CBSDC
Posted on 01/08/2014 7:01:13 AM PST by Third Person
Edited on 01/08/2014 7:11:13 AM PST by Admin Moderator.
[history]
There will be no trademark for
(Excerpt) Read more at washington.cbslocal.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: americanindians; derogatoryslang; mascot; redskins; slur; trademark
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Oh, Big Brother!
To: Third Person
2
posted on
01/08/2014 7:03:01 AM PST
by
BunnySlippers
(I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
To: Third Person
No more redskin peanuts? No redskin potatoes?
3
posted on
01/08/2014 7:03:08 AM PST
by
brownsfan
(Behold, the power of government cheese.)
To: Third Person
I have contempt for our government.
4
posted on
01/08/2014 7:03:27 AM PST
by
FreeAtlanta
(Liberty or Big Government - you can't have both.)
To: Third Person
Faux scandals, all of them.
5
posted on
01/08/2014 7:05:06 AM PST
by
rarestia
(It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
To: Third Person
I guess they could change the name to RASH HOG RINDS.
6
posted on
01/08/2014 7:06:14 AM PST
by
Datom
(Still runnin' "Against the Wind.")
To: Third Person
Who asked for your worthless opinion?
7
posted on
01/08/2014 7:06:29 AM PST
by
Common Sense 101
(Hey libs... If your theories fly in the face of reality, it's not reality that's wrong.)
To: Third Person
I foresee the beginning of a cottage industry.
To: Third Person
The US Trademark office is the Ministry of Truth I guess.
9
posted on
01/08/2014 7:07:01 AM PST
by
subterfuge
(CBS NBC ABC FOX AP-- all no different than Pravda.)
To: Third Person
10
posted on
01/08/2014 7:08:54 AM PST
by
Paladin2
To: Third Person
Did anyone notice that during the Rose Bowl Monday night, the announcers could not bring themselves to call Florida State, Seminoles?
...they became the 'noles all night long.
To: Third Person
How about calling them Mohammedan Hog Rinds?
No one would object to that, right?
Shoot, I’d buy several bags and I don’t even like Mohammedans or Hog Rinds.
12
posted on
01/08/2014 7:11:14 AM PST
by
Responsibility2nd
(NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
To: Third Person
I completely agree with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on this one. Derogatory slang has no place in our society.
On a related note, I have been called a "cracker" more than one in my lifetime. That hurts, it really does.
I therefore request (demand, actually) that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office revoke the trademark of any product containing the word "cracker."
13
posted on
01/08/2014 7:11:44 AM PST
by
Leaning Right
(Why am I holding this lantern? I am looking for the next Reagan.)
To: Third Person
To: FReepers
Click The Pic To Donate
Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can
15
posted on
01/08/2014 7:18:03 AM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
To: Third Person
THE WASHINGTONDEMONRATS
16
posted on
01/08/2014 7:18:57 AM PST
by
Slyfox
(We want our pre-existing HEALTH INSURANCE back!)
To: All
Is there any precedent for this agency to interfere with private business like this?
17
posted on
01/08/2014 7:23:59 AM PST
by
rockrr
(Everything is different now...)
To: Third Person
How about “ThinSkins”? X~o
18
posted on
01/08/2014 7:41:24 AM PST
by
Bikkuri
( those would have been affected.)
To: Third Person
That’s the least of the skins’ problems...
To: rockrr
Is there any precedent for this agency to interfere with private business like this?
Congress enacted this law:
15 U.S.C. §1052 (Extract)
No trademark by which the goods of the applicant may be distinguished from the goods of others shall be refused registration on the principal register on account of its nature unless it
(a) Consists of or comprises 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; or a geographical indication which, when used on or in connection with wines or spirits, identifies a place other than the origin of the goods and is first used on or in connection with wines or spirits by the applicant on or after one year after the date on which the WTO Agreement (as defined in section 2(9) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act) enters into force with respect to the United States.
*****
20
posted on
01/08/2014 7:50:24 AM PST
by
Atlas Sneezed
("Income Inequality?" Let's start with DC vs. the rest of the nation!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson