Tweet
Will a new bill force a name change for Washington, D.C.'s Football Team?
After the U. S. Patent Office’s Trial and Appeal Board heard a trademark challenge just two weeks ago, yesterday H.R. 1278, the “Non-Disparagement of Native American Persons or Peoples in Trademark Registration Act of 2013,” was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. In practice it would cancel the federal trademark protection presently enjoyed by the now widely reviled nickname of the NFL team associated with the nation’s capital. (For general background, see here, updated here and here.)
The bill was authored by Delegate Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa) and co-sponsored by Delegates Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), who has championed changing the team’s name locally, and Donna Christensen (D-Virgins Islands), and the following Representatives:
Karen Bass (D-CA)
Tom Cole (R-OK)
Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ)
Michael “Mike” Honda (D-CA)
John Lewis (D-GA)
Betty McCollum (D-MN)
Gwen Moore (D-WI)
The Government Printing Office has not yet made the text of the bill available, but according to the Samoan website Talanei, it amends a clause in the existing trademark law, the Lanham Act of 1946, which compels refusal of registration to any trademark that “consists of or comprises . . . matter which may disparage . . . persons, living or dead . . . or bring them into contempt, or disrepute,” to explicitly include use of the Washington team’s R-word nickname as constituting such disparagement.
The team’s front office had no comment, perhaps realizing that its standard excuse (that it does not “intend” disparagement) has not gone over well lately.
The bill has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, and the discussions I’ve seen tend to downplay the possibility that the committee will even consider the bill; nonetheless, it would appear that momentum is still building to change the name.
Update 3/26/13: the bill’s text.
Photo by Keith Allison released under a Creative Commons Share Alike license.
9 Comments
I assume that the amendment to the patent law would be retroactive the way the introduced law was written? Surely the creators of the law would have thought of that. But then, we so often ask that simple question, and are proven prescient, not absurd.
It’s hard to say w/o the text of the bill, wd, and the Library of Congress “Thomas” listing still says it’s unavailable as I write. I assume Talanei is working from a copy supplied by its Delegate Faleomavaega himself, but its report that I link to in the post does not get into retroactivity. (It does add that the trademark board has denied trademarks four times for use of the R-word, including the ancestor of the action heard two weeks ago that was thrown out on appeal.)
On the other hand it’s not clear to me what the issue would mean in practice should the bill become law. I guess it depends on what lawsuits the team has successfully waged for infringement in the past, a matter where I have no info (and don’t feel much like researching, frankly).
Also, in a bit of inspirational news, it turns out that the student body of the high school in Cooperstown, N.Y. (yes, THAT Cooperstown) voted on February 4 to get rid of the R-word as the name of their sports teams, and on March 6 the Cooperstown Central School Board of Education followed suit in a 6-1 vote.
Kudos to the FDL editors for the photo. It’s perfect!
Why is it that you make me want to write ‘Redskins, Redskins’, Redskins’?
Again, it’s certainly not indecent or a pejorative to use it in conversations, now is it? The talanei website didn’t even capitalize it, lol. Sorry to harsh your mellow over it, but your sensitivity seems excessive to me, and almost gives the term more power, not less. That may be your point, I dunno, EF BEall.
If the Kansas City Star, for one, can refuse to print the name in its sports coverage (just as it would not print the N-word), then so can I.
LOL! Eh bien...
“LOL?”
Frankly, wd, I’m sorry you have chosen to take this discussion in the direction of commenting on my “sensitivity” as you call it, wd, and finding it amusing, rather than, say, commenting on the significance of the Cooperstown, NY High School ditching the name.
The lol was meant to signify that okay, you’d made your point…up to a point, given that the KCS refused to use the term. Meaning: you reckon you’re in good company. And yes, it’s fine that the student body at Cooperstown voted for, and has effected, the name change. Sorry to have pricked your lack of sense of humor on my spinning wheel so seriously.
But I stand by my larger point about avoiding the word. And: it’s your blog, you are free to delete my comments as you see fit. I’ll even tell you how.
No comment.
(I’m willing to drop the tit-for-tat if you are. I foresee issues that we both agree on ahead.)