Redskins

Redskins: Trademark Ruling Has ‘No Effect’ on Team’s Use of Name and Logo

View Comments
File photo of a Washington Redskins helmet. (credit: Rob Carr/Getty Images)

File photo of a Washington Redskins helmet. (credit: Rob Carr/Getty Images)

More from 106.7 the Fan
Redskins Central
Buy Redskins Tickets
Sun Oct.19
Home vs Tennessee Titans
findticketsbtn Redskins: Trademark Ruling Has No Effect on Teams Use of Name and Logo
Mon Oct.27
Away vs Dallas Cowboys
findticketsbtn Redskins: Trademark Ruling Has No Effect on Teams Use of Name and Logo
Sun Nov.2
Away vs Minnesota Vikings
findticketsbtn Redskins: Trademark Ruling Has No Effect on Teams Use of Name and Logo
 

WASHINGTON (CBSDC) – The Washington Redskins have released a statement in response to Wednesday’s ruling by the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board cancelling, pending an appeal from the team, the Redskins six federal trademarks, due to the team’s “disparaging” name.

The statement, issued by Bob Raskopf, the team’s trademark attorney, notes in bold in the second line:

“We’ve seen this story before.   And just like last time, today’s ruling will have no effect at all on the team’s ownership of and right to use the Redskins name and logo.”

Here’s the full statement:

The following is a statement by Bob Raskopf, trademark attorney for the Washington Redskins, regarding today’s split decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board:

“We’ve seen this story before. And just like last time, today’s ruling will have no effect at all on the team’s ownership of and right to use the Redskins name and logo.

‘Redskins Are Denied Trademarks’

-Washington Post, April 3, 1999

‘Redskins Can Keep Trademark, Judge Rules’

-Washington Post, October 2, 2003

We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s divided ruling will be overturned on appeal.  This case is no different than an earlier case, where the Board cancelled the Redskins’ trademark registrations, and where a federal district court disagreed and reversed the Board.

As today’s dissenting opinion correctly states, “the same evidence previously found insufficient to support cancellation” here “remains insufficient” and does not support cancellation.

This ruling – which of course we will appeal – simply addresses the team’s federal trademark registrations, and the team will continue to own and be able to protect its marks without the registrations.  The registrations will remain effective while the case is on appeal.

When the case first arose more than 20 years ago, a federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled on appeal in favor of the Washington Redskins and their trademark registrations.

Why?

As the district court’s ruling made clear in 2003, the evidence ‘is insufficient to conclude that during the relevant time periods the trademark at issue disparaged Native Americans…’ The court continued, ‘The Court concludes that the [Board’s] finding that the marks at issue ‘may disparage’ Native Americans is unsupported by substantial evidence, is logically flawed, and fails to apply the correct legal standard to its own findings of fact.’ Those aren’t my words. That was the court’s conclusion.  We are confident that when a district court review’s today’s split decision, it will reach a similar conclusion.

In today’s ruling, the Board’s Marc Bergsman agreed, concluding in his dissenting opinion:

It is astounding that the petitioners did not submit any evidence regarding the Native American population during the relevant time frame, nor did they introduce any evidence or argument as to what comprises a substantial composite of that population thereby leaving it to the majority to make petitioner’s case have some semblance of meaning.

The evidence in the current claim is virtually identical to the evidence a federal judge decided was insufficient more than ten years ago. We expect the same ultimate outcome here.”

View Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,655 other followers