 |
July 08, 2014, 07:43:46 PM |
|
A few things here:
1. Its not that the name "is" racist or that Native Americans want it changed, that's the controversy. There are some people Both Native American and Not, who think its offensive. There are also some people both Native American and not who like the name and want it kept. Opinions are very divided both in and outside the Native community.
2. Even IF the trademark is invalidated (its still being appealed now) that doesn't mean you can use it. Its still under common law.
Basically, being "trademarked" means little. Someone can come out with their own version of someone elses logo or brand or all they want, trademark or no. You can then choose to sue them over it, IF You feel like bothering.
You then have to prove that whatever they are using is clearly related to your brand, that it would cause confusion with a customer, and/or that they are profiting from your market rep, etc.
A trademark just makes it easy, by making you not have to "prove" it each time. Having a trademark means that the court already has a list of all the things that you have already called dibbs on.
No trademark means you have to go in an actually make your case every time it happens.
For the Redskins, having to make their case is a non issue, because they've been around so long, and have national TV exposure, etc etc, so there is no problem at all for them to make the case that the logo, or their name, or certain phrases combined with their team colors are clearly and obviously a reference to their brand.
Losing the trademark looks bad, PR wise, but it wouldn't do anything to keep them from protecting their brand.
|
