« More on Camp Clark | Main | The Ventures »

June 19, 2014


well, we elders have not have our country stolen from us (yet) so I hardly think it's a comparable issue. I just wish I had thought to buy a Washington Redskins jacket for each of my great-grandsone. They'd be worth a lot of $$ some day.

grandsons, that is....

The issue to me is this: I feel that it's silly to deny a trademark on the judged propriety of a name!

Some may wish to visit A List of Offensive & Disparaging Names That the Obama Trademark Office Allows. I don't much care for many of the names; but, in no way do I think that they should be denied a trademark just because I don't care for them.

I should think that jackets would still be available since lack of trademark just means that the team cannot control who uses their name on merchandise. Of course, not being a fan of anything that would inform me, perhaps there will be additional value to jackets that were "authentically" tied to the team - such as those still on sale (I should think), today. To my remembrance, I've not ever owned an article of clothing or adornment that advertised a sports team. Not my thing.

This whole thing reminds me of the effort that the DMV in my current state puts into assuring that rude language doesn't make it onto our vehicle license plates. I had to laugh the other day when I saw that there are probably 999 license plates being driven throughout Kansas bearing an alpha-numeric of the form: xxx FUK. Make that 1000 since 000 is allowed and used for the numeric portion.

read in the paper today that washington can still continue to call its football team "the redskins." Our dear City Paper calls it the "Pigskins." BTW, the City Paper's paperbox was empty today. Dang. It comes out every Thursday.

Maybe to make it equal they should strip the trademark from the Fighting Irish at Notre Dame. If I owned the team I would change the name to the Washington Calvary just to stir things up.

Not that I for one moment defend defamation. I just feel that we sometimes see ill intent/derogation where there is none. As Rodney King said, "Can't we all just get along?"

I agree. If they wanted to name a new team something like that, I would say it is not appropriate. But it has been that for a long time and it is the team of our nations capital, so it is not meant to be derogatory. There are plenty of real problems to worry about in the DC area, maybe focus on some of them.

how many native americans do you know well? i don't mind being called "old" or "elder." (and as Sarah Schulman says, "I am an elder. don't fuck with me.") But the horrendous pain endured by those who are native americans continues. we can't just tell them to "lighten up."

"how many native americans do you know well?" That was snotty and stupid. For all I know, being from Kansas, you are part N.A. My point, if I had one, is that only some people care deeply about professional football, and only some pay any attention to what they call political correctness.

The pain for the American Indians around here is so horrendous that they are fighting amongst themselves because one faction apparently bought a bunch of gold bars with embezzled casino money and also took the tribe's Lear Jet to watch professional baseball games all over the country.

I'm closing the comments to this posting since we seem to be communicating rather poorly when someone thinks that my point about trademark issuance depends upon how many Native Americans I know (answer: somewhere between zero and 3,000 - not inclusive) or whether I may be Native American, myself (answer: between 0% and 100% - not inclusive). I need to learn to write better!

As to our sometimes dashing off a comment that makes us sound snotty and stupid: Been there, done that!

Sorry, friends, I've never closed comments on a posting before; but, I see no point in extending the debate. Let us exit laughing - or at least, friendly!
; )

The comments to this entry are closed.

Support Wikipedia