Washington Redskins trademark canceled by U.S. Patent Office

The National Football League team, the Washington Redskins, has had the trademark protection for its name and logo removed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. On Wednesday, the federal agency ruled that the name is “disparaging to Native Americans” and thus cannot be trademarked. Under federal law, trademarks that “may disparage persons or bring them into contempt or disrepute” cannot be registered.

The case against the Washington Redskins was brought upon by the plaintiff and Native American activist Amanda Blackhorse, who said in a statement that “we don’t think that Dan Snyder and the Washington Redskins co-owners should make money off of a racial slur directed at Native American people.”

“When you have a Native American mascot for a team, you have no control over what happens in that stadium. There’s a lot of things that are very negative towards Native American people,” Blackhorse says.

The legal battle over the Redskins trademark has been playing out for more than two decades. The efforts against the Redskins trademark began in 1992, when a Native American activist group filed a petition with the trademark office.

In 2003, the Trial Trademark and Appeal Board (TTAB) cancelled the trademark registrations of the Redskins. However, that same year, a U.S. district judge ruled that the trademark office hadn’t successfully explained why the Redskins logo was disparaging. According to the judge, “after reviewing all of these pleadings, the entire record submitted herein, the relevant case law and statutory framework, and the transcript of the July 23, 2003, motions hearing, the Court concludes that the TTAB’s decision must be reversed.”

Unlike in 2003, the U.S. Patent Office said in its Wednesday ruling that, “based on the evidence properly before us, that these registrations must be cancelled because they were disparaging to Native Americans at the respective times they were registered, in violation of Section 2(a)  of the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a).”

Although the ruling does not force Redskins owner Dan Snyder to change the team’s name, it does put financial pressure on him to make a change. Without trademark protection, anyone can technically produce and sell Washington Redskins gear without having to worry about paying the NFL or the Redskins any royalties.

It is yet to be seen if state and common laws will allow the Redskins to retain their exclusivity of use, despite the loss of their trademarks. According to Sonia Katayl, an intellectual property law professor at Fordham, “The law is really unclear on this. We haven’t really had something like this where you have a team and so many other interested parties involved, so we’re treading new ground.”

According to Bob Raskopf, the trademark attorney for the Redskins, the team will appeal the ruling. In a statement made Wednesday, Raskopf said, “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. We are confident we will prevail once again, and that the Trial and Appeal Board’s divided ruling will be overturned on appeal. This case is no different than an earlier case.”

However, according to Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., “this puts a big dent in their business model of trying to gain revenue from a disparaging term of slur. I find it very unlikely that someone is going to overrule the patent office on this. This is a huge decision by a federal agency.”