Redskins lose Trademark Registration
-
Here is a link to article:
http://cle.247sports.com/Bolt/BREAKING-Court-rules-against-Redskins-38106585
Let this be noted: they are losing their right to trademark registration, NOT their right to the trademarks themselves.
They can continue to use the Redskin name and the logos they have been using. Nothing stops them from doing that.
What they likely lose is the right to trademark protections. In other words, basically, they can use all these images they want, but cannot win a lawsuit for trademark infringement against someone else who would want to use the name/symbols.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
-
Here is a link to article:
http://cle.247sports.com/Bolt/BREAKING-Court-rules-against-Redskins-38106585
Let this be noted: they are losing their right to trademark registration, NOT their right to the trademarks themselves.
They can continue to use the Redskin name and the logos they have been using. Nothing stops them from doing that.
What they likely lose is the right to trademark protections. In other words, basically, they can use all these images they want, but cannot win a lawsuit for trademark infringement against someone else who would want to use the name/symbols.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
I wouldnt think anyone would want the name per se, but Im sure someone-somewhere will find a way to legally use it to embarrass or denigrate the Redskins Org....certainly there are people who will find a way to make money off of it w/o the fear of legal retribution....
-
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
I wouldnt think anyone would want the name per se, but Im sure someone-somewhere will find a way to legally use it to embarrass or denigrate the Redskins Org....certainly there are people who will find a way to make money off of it w/o the fear of legal retribution....
I wouldnt think anyone would want the name per se, but Im sure someone-somewhere will find a way to legally use it to embarrass or denigrate the Redskins Org....certainly there are people who will find a way to make money off of it w/o the fear of legal retribution....
As noted, they have always had the right to use it to embarrass or denigrate the team......but not to make money. Like I said, knock off gear could be the one way that it could hurt.......and note, I believe the sale of paraphenalia is controlled by the league, not the team.....so this could hurt the league. And if the league is hurt financially....and if the league cannot enforce its trademarks, then the league may end up being the entity that could put the most pressure on the Skins to change their ways.
-
See this: Merchandising of paraphenalia is a major source of revenue for the NFL:
Top Five Revenue Sources That Drive Value for the NFL- 02/22/2013
- /
- Pellegrino News
Football is one of the most beloved American sports pastimes. Avid fans follow their favorite teams whether those teams win or lose. Many households plan their entire Sundays around football during the season, anticipating the next big play from high-profile team members. But, besides talent, what drives value for the NFL?
The NFL is worth billions of dollars. While the exact amount is not known, Forbes reports that at least 20 out of the 32 teams are worth more than $1 billion. The following list describes the top five sources that drive value for these teams.
1. Ticket sales. Ticket sales provide a great resource of revenue for the NFL, with each team generating approximately $51 million per year. With stadium seating ranging from capacities of 65,000 to 85,000, and with ticket prices at a near average of $80, ticket sales add up. And we can’t forget the Super Bowl because Super Bowl ticket prices rise tremendously in comparison with regular season tickets. For Super Bowl XLVII, average ticket prices were $3,100!
2. Merchandising. Hats, key chains, cups, socks, and of course jerseys name just the surface of available NFL merchandise. In 2010, NFL merchandise sales reached $2.1 billion. Merchandise is one of the most effective revenue sources because the reach extends beyond the United States–a reach that is more difficult for other revenue sources such as ticket sales and venue revenue.
3. Advertising. In the last decade, advertisers spent $1.85 billion during the Super Bowl alone. For the Super Bowl this year, a 30-second commercial increased to $4 million from $3.5 million the previous year! During the regular season, advertisers spend $3 billion.
4. Venue. The venue plays a big role in NFL revenue because it provides a variety of ways to generate revenue. New or updated stadiums are likely to fuel more dollars to the NFL because they tend to offer more seating, better views, and other perks.Forbes indicates that teams increase their value when new stadiums are built. Furthermore, venues position a variety of vendors such as food, beverage, and merchandise directly in front of football fans, giving vendors the ability to charge high prices. For instance, the 49ers make $6.8 million per year on just concession and merchandise sales.
5. Licensing. The NFL takes aggressive measures to insure its copyrights and trademarks are protected. It also charges a considerable fee to use the league’s intellectual property. In fact, at the end of December 2011, it was announced that the league was expected to increase its rights fees by 63 percent. One source indicates that television networks will pay almost $28 billion over a nine-year period to air NFL games! Additionally, advertisers that wish to promote products using NFL terms must license trademarks, which increases the cost of an already very expensive ad or marketing effort.
As noted above, the NFL generates a considerable amount of revenue in the sports industry. In fact, it generates the most out of any other major league in the United States. In 2010, NFL revenue reached $8 billion. However, if one or more of the above revenue sources were to falter, the league could suffer major losses. For instance, a lockdown could affect all of the revenue sources, resulting in a significant amount of loss in revenue. However, as the most watched, most attended, and most popular sport in terms of merchandise in America, it is likely that the NFL will remain lucrative and retain its revenue resources.
-
I wonder if their logo(the indian image) would be ok, if they just agreed to change the name?
A decent compromise might be to change the "redskins" name, whilst maintaining the familiar colors and logo design.....
Ironically, I think they have exactly the opposite issue to the Indians.....in that our name is ok, but the Chief Wahoo logo seems to offend some......conversely, Washingtons logo seems fine, but the name offends....
-
Mudfly, some want to keep the logo and change the name to the Americans.
You ask me, this is all complete BS.
-
I wonder if their logo(the indian image) would be ok, if they just agreed to change the name?
A decent compromise might be to change the "redskins" name, whilst maintaining the familiar colors and logo design.....
Ironically, I think they have exactly the opposite issue to the Indians.....in that our name is ok, but the Chief Wahoo logo seems to offend some......conversely, Washingtons logo seems fine, but the name offends....
I wonder if their logo(the indian image) would be ok, if they just agreed to change the name?
A decent compromise might be to change the "redskins" name, whilst maintaining the familiar colors and logo design.....
Ironically, I think they have exactly the opposite issue to the Indians.....in that our name is ok, but the Chief Wahoo logo seems to offend some......conversely, Washingtons logo seems fine, but the name offends....
Dan Snyder says that they will never change the name of the team. Well, if the NFL loses millions and millions of dollars because anyone could go out and buy Redskin gear at 1/3rd or half the cost.....just to pay for the name and licensing, then the NFL may convince Snyder to change his mind....by way of a threat to cut his throat financially.
That is what it will take....the NFL (not Snyder who probably doesn't care about the money he loses) to lose big time money on the deal.
-
Mudfly, some want to keep the logo and change the name to the Americans.
You ask me, this is all complete BS.
Mudfly, some want to keep the logo and change the name to the Americans.
You ask me, this is all complete BS.
What do you mean "we" Kemo Sabe?
-
Fuck the pc people. Keep the name.
-
Mudfly, some want to keep the logo and change the name to the Americans.
You ask me, this is all complete BS.
What do you mean "we" Kemo Sabe?
What do you mean "we" Kemo Sabe?
Huh?
-
Here is a link to article:
http://cle.247sports.com/Bolt/BREAKING-Court-rules-against-Redskins-38106585
Let this be noted: they are losing their right to trademark registration, NOT their right to the trademarks themselves.
They can continue to use the Redskin name and the logos they have been using. Nothing stops them from doing that.
What they likely lose is the right to trademark protections. In other words, basically, they can use all these images they want, but cannot win a lawsuit for trademark infringement against someone else who would want to use the name/symbols.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
Here is a link to article:
http://cle.247sports.com/Bolt/BREAKING-Court-rules-against-Redskins-38106585
Let this be noted: they are losing their right to trademark registration, NOT their right to the trademarks themselves.
They can continue to use the Redskin name and the logos they have been using. Nothing stops them from doing that.
What they likely lose is the right to trademark protections. In other words, basically, they can use all these images they want, but cannot win a lawsuit for trademark infringement against someone else who would want to use the name/symbols.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
The NFL holds those rights, so they could stop knock-offs, at least on items for sale. It is sold as official NFL merchandise.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
I wonder if their logo(the indian image) would be ok, if they just agreed to change the name?
A decent compromise might be to change the "redskins" name, whilst maintaining the familiar colors and logo design.....
Ironically, I think they have exactly the opposite issue to the Indians.....in that our name is ok, but the Chief Wahoo logo seems to offend some......conversely, Washingtons logo seems fine, but the name offends....
I wonder if their logo(the indian image) would be ok, if they just agreed to change the name?
A decent compromise might be to change the "redskins" name, whilst maintaining the familiar colors and logo design.....
Ironically, I think they have exactly the opposite issue to the Indians.....in that our name is ok, but the Chief Wahoo logo seems to offend some......conversely, Washingtons logo seems fine, but the name offends....
Yep.
The name "Indians" is not derogatory, but that logo is hideous. Opposite of the Redskins.
The Cleveland Indians with that Redskins logo would be cool.
Imagine the Washington Redskins with that red faced Chief Wahoo as their logo.
Its good to see that the Indians have arrived into the 21 Century by using the letter "C" instead of that ugly ass logo.
-
They still use the logo, Stuart. And it is the best logo in sports IMO.
-
They still use the logo, Stuart. And it is the best logo in sports IMO.
Chief Wahoo the best logo in sports? A face only a mother could love I guess.
You take a national poll and I assure you it would not be the best logo in sports.
I found this..not a poll though. Seems to be the opinion of one person.
No Cleve team ranked.
At one time Cleveland did possess one of the best logos in sports, but Republic Steel of Cleveland gave it to Pittsburgh.lol
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2025054-power-ranking-the-best-logos-in-sports
-
I wonder if their logo(the indian image) would be ok, if they just agreed to change the name?
A decent compromise might be to change the "redskins" name, whilst maintaining the familiar colors and logo design.....
Ironically, I think they have exactly the opposite issue to the Indians.....in that our name is ok, but the Chief Wahoo logo seems to offend some......conversely, Washingtons logo seems fine, but the name offends....
Yep.
The name "Indians" is not derogatory, but that logo is hideous. Opposite of the Redskins.
The Cleveland Indians with that Redskins logo would be cool.
Imagine the Washington Redskins with that red faced Chief Wahoo as their logo.
Its good to see that the Indians have arrived into the 21 Century by using the letter "C" instead of that ugly ass logo.
Stuart said:
Yep.
The name "Indians" is not derogatory, but that logo is hideous. Opposite of the Redskins.
The Cleveland Indians with that Redskins logo would be cool.
Imagine the Washington Redskins with that red faced Chief Wahoo as their logo.
Its good to see that the Indians have arrived into the 21 Century by using the letter "C" instead of that ugly ass logo.
The Chief has character. All the years I was growing up and heading downtown using Clifton. Heading onto the shoreway and crossing over the bridge, there sat Chief Wahoo, bigger than life on the outside of Muni. That is the best logo to me in all of sports.
Still, why is it only football? The Blackhawks, the Braves, the tribe all have their names intact. Even Louisiana Monroe caved to the pressure. Are the Seminoles and Utes next?
-
Here is a link to article:
http://cle.247sports.com/Bolt/BREAKING-Court-rules-against-Redskins-38106585
Let this be noted: they are losing their right to trademark registration, NOT their right to the trademarks themselves.
They can continue to use the Redskin name and the logos they have been using. Nothing stops them from doing that.
What they likely lose is the right to trademark protections. In other words, basically, they can use all these images they want, but cannot win a lawsuit for trademark infringement against someone else who would want to use the name/symbols.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
Here is a link to article:
http://cle.247sports.com/Bolt/BREAKING-Court-rules-against-Redskins-38106585
Let this be noted: they are losing their right to trademark registration, NOT their right to the trademarks themselves.
They can continue to use the Redskin name and the logos they have been using. Nothing stops them from doing that.
What they likely lose is the right to trademark protections. In other words, basically, they can use all these images they want, but cannot win a lawsuit for trademark infringement against someone else who would want to use the name/symbols.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
Here is a link to article:
http://cle.247sports.com/Bolt/BREAKING-Court-rules-against-Redskins-38106585
Let this be noted: they are losing their right to trademark registration, NOT their right to the trademarks themselves.
They can continue to use the Redskin name and the logos they have been using. Nothing stops them from doing that.
What they likely lose is the right to trademark protections. In other words, basically, they can use all these images they want, but cannot win a lawsuit for trademark infringement against someone else who would want to use the name/symbols.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
They are still a licensed property under the NFL correct? I mean you think the NFL is going to put up with people using one of their trademarked and copyrighted money makers?
-
They still use the logo, Stuart. And it is the best logo in sports IMO.
Chief Wahoo the best logo in sports? A face only a mother could love I guess.
You take a national poll and I assure you it would not be the best logo in sports.
I found this..not a poll though. Seems to be the opinion of one person.
No Cleve team ranked.
At one time Cleveland did possess one of the best logos in sports, but Republic Steel of Cleveland gave it to Pittsburgh.lol
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2025054-power-ranking-the-best-logos-in-sports
Stuart said:
Chief Wahoo the best logo in sports? A face only a mother could love I guess.
You take a national poll and I assure you it would not be the best logo in sports.
I found this..not a poll though. Seems to be the opinion of one person.
No Cleve team ranked.
At one time Cleveland did possess one of the best logos in sports, but Republic Steel of Cleveland gave it to Pittsburgh.lol
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2025054-power-ranking-the-best-logos-in-sports
Wasn't it U.S. Steel? I just don't remember. Suffering from CRS tonight.
-
Edward, second best logo is Arkansas I must say.
-
Here is a link to article:
http://cle.247sports.com/Bolt/BREAKING-Court-rules-against-Redskins-38106585
Let this be noted: they are losing their right to trademark registration, NOT their right to the trademarks themselves.
They can continue to use the Redskin name and the logos they have been using. Nothing stops them from doing that.
What they likely lose is the right to trademark protections. In other words, basically, they can use all these images they want, but cannot win a lawsuit for trademark infringement against someone else who would want to use the name/symbols.
But, the question: who else would want to use this name and symbols for profit? Under free speech rules these symbols were always free to be satirized and criticised.
Maybe the one thing they lose is the right to ask for an injunction against someone that is making knockoff gear....but that is all to be fleshed out.
The NFL holds those rights, so they could stop knock-offs, at least on items for sale. It is sold as official NFL merchandise.
The NFL holds those rights, so they could stop knock-offs, at least on items for sale. It is sold as official NFL merchandise.
I don't think that would matter. As I understand it, the images lose protection regardless of who "owns it". Do you think that the NFL was not a party to this litigation? Certainly they were and the ruling applies to them as well as the team.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login