The Redskins just need to change their logo right?

Tom_Spangler wrote:

Adrian_Thompson wrote: In reply to Tom_Spangler: They've removed the trademark protection, not forced them to change their name. They can keep the nae but the government won't help them defend it.

Oh? Is this something they do all the time? Come on, it was a targeted effort to get them to change the name. You and I both know it.

The government won't help them defend it, that may be a not so subtle hint to change it, but they are not being forced to change it. This isn't big government saying you have to do something, it's sensible government saying we don't like what your doing, we don't approve, we wont help you defend it, but we're not forcing you to do it.

Also they can still go after counterfitters in civil court. This has happened before and they didn't go bust or change their name last time. The Federal Trademark protection was revoked in (I think, don't quote me) 97 and only reinstated early last decade.

aircooled wrote:

This picture is definitely worth a thousand words.

aircooled wrote: http://www.theonion.com/articles/redskins-kike-owner-refuses-to-change-teams-offens,34292/ --------------- WASHINGTON—Denying widespread claims that the franchise is being offensive or disrespectful, the Washington Redskins’ kike owner announced Monday that he remains steadfast in his refusal to change the team’s derogatory name. “The Redskins represent 81 years of great history and tradition, and it’s a source of pride for our fans,” said the hook-nosed kike, stressing that the team’s insulting moniker is “absolutely not a racial slur by any means.” “‘Washington Redskins’ is much more than just a name. It stands for strength, courage, and respect—the very values that are so intrinsic to Native American culture.” The shifty-eyed hebe went on to assure fans that he will do “everything in his power” to preserve the team’s proud heritage. ---------------

I might watch more sports if all the team names were making fun of racial stereotypes. I bet the San Fran Chinamen would make a ton of money selling conical straw hats. Can you see the stands of the New York Jews filled with fans wearing what amounted to Groucho Marx style glasses and noses? That whole thing could be a scene out of Blazing Saddles...

"Camp town ladies sing that song do dah! do dah"

Adrian_Thompson wrote:

Tom_Spangler wrote:

Adrian_Thompson wrote: In reply to Tom_Spangler: They've removed the trademark protection, not forced them to change their name. They can keep the nae but the government won't help them defend it.

Oh? Is this something they do all the time? Come on, it was a targeted effort to get them to change the name. You and I both know it.

The government won't help them defend it, that may be a not so subtle hint to change it, but they are not being forced to change it. This isn't big government saying you have to do something, it's sensible government saying we don't like what your doing, we don't approve, we wont help you defend it, but we're not forcing you to do it. Also they can still go after counterfitters in civil court. This has happened before and they didn't go bust or change their name last time. The Federal Trademark protection was revoked in (I think, don't quote me) 97 and only reinstated early last decade.

"Sensible Government" - You must not be from around here...

bravenrace wrote: I wonder how people come to the conclusion that a name is racist. It could just as easily be paying honor to the name. We've become a nation of thin skinned PC weenies. A poll of Indians, er, I mean native Americans showed that the vast majority of them have no problem with that name or the Indians, so why should anybody else? Well in fact it turns out that most Americans have no problem with it either.

It's a racial slur. It's not like the team was named after a tribe or something, it's a term meant to denigrate. Just because it's been around for 80 years doesn't make it not so. And I say this as a graduate of Eastern Michigan University who used to have a "Once a Huron, Always a Huron" bumper sticker on his car. For those who don't know, the school changed it's mascot from "Hurons" to "Eagles" in 1990. I'm as opposed to blatant political correctness as anyone, but there has to be a line somewhere, IMO.

Adrian: It's not the government's job to approve or disapprove of free speech. If the Redskins want to have a racist name, they should be free to do so and have the protection of law to do it. If that means they lose fans or get protested, then so be it, maybe they will change it on their own. Since Dan Snyder is a huge shiny happy person, they won't, but that's on him.

failboat wrote: Apparently it doesnt matter. The only thing that does matter is that at least ONE person was offended. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/09/11/goodell-on-redskins-name-if-one-person-is-offended-we-have-to-listen/

What a steaming pile of E36 M3. I don't care what you are talking about, you can always find one shiny happy person who is offended.

Personally, I don't find it racist, but do find that term to be derogatory. I have no problem using indians, braves or warriors. The Seminoles have no problems with FSU, despite what all FSU can do to embarress them.

Adrian_Thompson wrote:

Tom_Spangler wrote:

Adrian_Thompson wrote: In reply to Tom_Spangler: They've removed the trademark protection, not forced them to change their name. They can keep the nae but the government won't help them defend it.

Oh? Is this something they do all the time? Come on, it was a targeted effort to get them to change the name. You and I both know it.

The government won't help them defend it, that may be a not so subtle hint to change it, but they are not being forced to change it. This isn't big government saying you have to do something, it's sensible government saying we don't like what your doing, we don't approve, we wont help you defend it, but we're not forcing you to do it. Also they can still go after counterfitters in civil court. This has happened before and they didn't go bust or change their name last time. The Federal Trademark protection was revoked in (I think, don't quote me) 97 and only reinstated early last decade.

Dude, I get your viewpoint, and I understand that you're fairly left leaning and all. No problems. I do not believe, however, that you truly think that the government did not force them to change their name. You've proven yourself to not be a total idiot in the past. If they can't earn money on the trademark, what good is the name?

Tom_Spangler wrote:

bravenrace wrote: I wonder how people come to the conclusion that a name is racist. It could just as easily be paying honor to the name. We've become a nation of thin skinned PC weenies. A poll of Indians, er, I mean native Americans showed that the vast majority of them have no problem with that name or the Indians, so why should anybody else? Well in fact it turns out that most Americans have no problem with it either.

It's a racial slur. It's not like the team was named after a tribe or something, it's a term meant to denigrate. Just because it's been around for 80 years doesn't make it not so. And I say this as a graduate of Eastern Michigan University who used to have a "Once a Huron, Always a Huron" bumper sticker on his car. For those who don't know, the school changed it's mascot from "Hurons" to "Eagles" in 1990. I'm as opposed to blatant political correctness as anyone, but there has to be a line somewhere, IMO. Adrian: It's not the government's job to approve or disapprove of free speech. If the Redskins want to have a racist name, they should be free to do so and have the protection of law to do it. If that means they lose fans or get protested, then so be it, maybe they will change it on their own. Since Dan Snyder is a huge shiny happy person, they won't, but that's on him.

You mean that you think it's a racial slur. I have found nothing that officially states that it is. Please make the distinction between fact and your opinion. You know why it wasn't viewed by anyone as a slur when it was created? Because there was nothing wrong with calling someone with red skin a redskin. It wasn't a slur, it was a fact. The American society has just devolved into thin skinned PC weenies that aren't happy unless they have something to complain about. The people that are the most upset about this aren't Indians. There are many references that point that out. If it doesn't offend the majority of Indians, then it should matter to anyone else either.

bravenrace wrote: calling someone with red skin a redskin. It wasn't a slur, it was a fact.

I don't really care about sports or the like and I'm not particularly up in arms over whether the name should be changed or not. But, uh, you know that the only people who actually have actually red skin are burned or bleeding, right? I'm gonna have to call bs on your "fact," nobody is walking around with skin this color unless they forgot the sunscreen.

In reply to KatieSuddard:

And your skin is actually white? Way to be overly-literal.

In reply to bravenrace:

And there you have hit the nail on the head. That's why people find it offensive. No one's skin is actually the color we call it unless you tell someone the numeric color breakdown in levels of red, blue, and green. If people are offended, don't say it. It's as simple as that.

The only "black" guy I've met was from Fiji, everyone else seemed to be a brownish colour.

All the indians (native american variety) I've ever met were soft brown, not red.

Even if the word isn't offensive, hopefully you could see how making a team mascot out of a racial stereotype could be offensive..."Jew" and "Indian" aren't offensive, maybe even "Chinaman" could pass, yet check out the pic with the hats.

In reply to KatieSuddard:

Bobzilla is most likely a redskin at the moment......being a ginger and spending the weekend at dragcross/autox events. But alas, he has no right to be offended as he lacks a soul anyways

My god you people are missing the point in the name of creating an argument that doesn't exist. On one hand you are saying that calling a sports team Redskins is offensive to indians. But then you say that indians don't have red skin. So if that term doesn't apply to them, why should they be offended? More to the point, why are you?
You are an example of one of the things that is wrong with this country. I say red skin. You all know what I mean, but you create an argument by taking that term literally. Too many people in this country are making arguments out of things that are non-issues. The vast majority of Indians are not offended by that sports teams name, or the Cleveland indians for that matter. So why make it an issue? I'll tell you why (again), because too many people have become thin skinned PC weenies. If you want to, you can probably find out a way to make just about everything offending to someone. What's the point? We've got huge problems in this world, and the name of a sports team isn't one of them. You might also be interested to know that the only sport I follow is car racing. I have no interest in Baseball or Football. I'll assume that you are all smart people. As such, I'm also going to assume you all knew what I meant when I said that they called them redskins because they had red skins. But in case you didn't follow that, I meant it in the same way that I have white skin. If you want to argue, how about we do it about something important, and not nit picking one little thing I said when you knew I didn't mean that they literally had red skin.

I does not matter if it's offensive. YOu do not have a right "Not to be offended".

There is also no issue if your wadded up panties decide to rally some like-minded folks to try to convince the owners to make a change thru protesting or just voting with your ticket dollars.

There is a problem when the government that has a sworn duty to uphold the 1st amendment has it's panties in a knot because it can't legally and directly order them to change the name so they decide to be petty berkeleys themselves and use coercion.

yamaha wrote: In reply to KatieSuddard: Bobzilla is most likely a redskin at the moment......being a ginger and spending the weekend at dragcross/autox events. But alas, he has no right to be offended as he lacks a soul anyways

So am I after doing yardwork in the sun all weekend. For the record, I'm not offended.

Wait a minute! Are you telling me that the US patent office did not contact the GRM hive mind before making a decision? The audacity of them for not first seeing if you guys were offended about a culture issue that has nothing to do with you!

KatieSuddard wrote: If people are offended, don't say it. It's as simple as that.

Would anyone ever be able to say anything if this were the rule?

tuna55 wrote:

KatieSuddard wrote: If people are offended, don't say it. It's as simple as that.

Would anyone ever be able to say anything if this were the rule?

Your mother wears socks that smell!

In reply to Cone_Junkie:

Politically motivated, end of debate. The IRS was probably behind it too(not that we'll ever be able to read their emails)

bravenrace wrote: You are an example of one of the things that is wrong with this country.

And I would claim you are one of the things that's wrong with this country, having no respect for a person that has a differing viewpoint from your own.

As to the subject matter at hand, federal trademark law provides for an absolute bar to the trademark registration of immoral or scandalous matter. You literally can not trademark something that is offensive, it has always been illegal. The decision is then simply whether or not something is offensive, and that is something left to the courts to decide.

Amazingly enough, many of the people I hear complaining about "PC this, PC that," tend to be some of the thinnest skinned and most easily offended people I meet. It's just that what they find offensive differs from what they're complaining of.

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Niggers

Trans_Maro wrote: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Niggers

That was hilarious. I almost lost it at "Noted physician Dr. Dre."

Also, people might need this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire