One longstanding effort to raise awareness and press for a name change has been to petition the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to cancel the team’s trademark registrations. The federal trademark statute (called the Lanham Act) provides that the PTO shall not grant any applications for trademark registration if the registration contains matter that “may disparage … persons, living or dead” or “bring them into contempt or disrepute.” The PTO, however, erroneously registered six of the team’s trademarks between 1967 and 1990 even though the marks contained the word “redskin,” which disparages Native Americans or brings them into contempt or disrepute. The Lanham Act allows people injured by the use of a trademark to petition the federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB, a part of the PTO) to cancel improperly granted registrations. In 1992, Suzan Shown Harjo and a group of Native American leaders filed precisely such a petition. The TTAB ruled in their favor and found that the term “redskin” disparages Native Americans and brings them into contempt or disrepute. However, this holding was reversed on appeal due to a technicality. In 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that Ms. Harjo and other petitioners had waited too many years after they reached their 18th birthdays and that their petitions were time-barred. As a result, a group of younger Native Americans filed a subsequent petition to cancel the trademark registrations. Because of their younger age, their petitions should not be time-barred. These younger Native Americans are members of the Navajo Nation, Paiute Tribe, Omaha Tribe, Kiowa Tribe, and the Muscogee Nation of Florida. This case is currently before the TTAB and is captioned Blackhorse v. Pro-Football, Inc. (Filings in the case are publicly available on the TTAB web site). The TTAB held a hearing on the Blackhorse case in March; the case is now awaiting a ruling by the TTAB.Get the Story:
Jesse Witten & Paul Moorehead: Can the Courts Force Snyder to Drop 'Redskins'? (Indian Country Today 10/17) Related Stories:
Gyasi Ross: Stepping into the debate over the Washington team (10/17)
Oneida Nation poll shows support for a new Washington mascot (10/17)
NBC's Bob Costas denounces Washington name during game (10/14)
Editorial: Washington team owner defending the indefensible (10/14)
Opinion: Washington mascot fight comes down to economics (10/14)
Column: The real letter from Washington football team owner (10/11)
Change the Mascot spot features President Obama, Rep. Cole (10/11)
Activists call for ban on Washington team name in Minnesota (10/11)
Suzan Shown Harjo still leading battle against racist mascots (10/10)
Washington team owner defends racist name in letter to fans (10/10)
Opinion: Ray Halbritter not a legitimate Oneida Nation leader (10/10)
AP can't find opponents of racist mascots in Indian Country (10/9)
NFL commissioner again calls for Washington team to 'listen' (10/9)
Column: Changes afoot for Washington football team mascot (10/9)
Column: It's time to retire racist Washington football mascot (10/9)
Opinion: NFL players can show leadership on racist mascots (10/9)
NFL set to meet with Oneida Nation to discuss racist mascot (10/8)
Mike Wise: Never may come sooner for Washington mascot (10/8)
Opinion: Owner of Washington football team in deep trouble (10/8)
Blog: Here's how to get rid of Washington's football mascot (10/8)
President Obama weighs in on Washington mascot debate (10/7)
Join the Conversation
