Jolt Country

Of course not. But now I am switching sides. I say, yes. Yes, please change the name to the Renegades or whatever, because God is this story boring, and it resurfaces every six months and it gets more boring every time.

Sure. Change the name. Nobody cares anymore.

Change it to the Washington Bullets! LOROLF!

Yes, every six months it comes back. Fine, the people wanting it changed win. Just stop the story. I wish that these people were as worked up with the actual difficulties that Indians face.

There is a legal doctrine called "laches" which is lawyerese for "you snooze, you lose."

The Washington Redskins Federally Registered the trademark for the name of their team in 1967, despite having used it since the late 1940s.

Under federal law, anyone objecting to the registration of the mark has 20 yeas to do so, after which the mark becomes "incontestable." Once a trademark is considered incontestable It generally cannot be cancelled except for very limited causes, usually involving either the mark becomes generic (like aspirin or escalator) or the owner fails to pay the renewal fees.

Anyone who felt the name was racist, offensive, or objectionable had 20 years to file an objection, that is, until 1987.

Besides, I think the idea of arguing a mark is offensive or objectionable became a dead letter when a particular word was accepted as a Federal Registration for "lollypops in the shape of a rooster." If you think the word registered was "cocksuckers" you'd be exactly right.

Arguing that the Redskins mark should be changed because some people find it offensive is a legal issue barred by laches. Anyone who could have objected waited way too long to do so.

I'm just going to go ahead and guess that none of that is true.

I'll top that. I'll guess that 20% of it is true.

Just for fun, I typed ANY OF WHAT HE SAID into Google and immediately got 2139 results telling me he was wrong:

http://www.loweringthebar.net/2012/12/t ... lipop.html

pinback wrote:Just for fun, I typed ANY OF WHAT HE SAID into Google and immediately got 2139 results telling me he was wrong:

http://www.loweringthebar.net/2012/12/t ... lipop.html

Well, so an appeals court cancelled it. Ir was registered at one time, so the PTO came to its senses and revoked the registration (or renewal).

You haven't said anything about the rest of my arguments, that those who object to the registration haven't shown the mark "Redskins" usage or context to be generally objectionable except in their minds. The exact same word is not considered offensive when used to refer to potatoes. The same thing cannot be said for the phrase "cock suckers."

You also haven't said that I'm wrong or provided any legal or other argument where the doctrine of "laches" is not applicable here. If this phrase is objectionable now I think it was objectionable through all of the 1970s and 1/2 of the 1980s and someone should have raised the issue then, not waited until it was a stale argument.

No one would have accepted "maggots" or the N-word followed by "head" that far back and the terms would never been acceptable back in the 1970s or 1st 1/2 of the 1980s. Now, after this mark has been in use for 40 years, they suddenly "discover" it's offensive, but nobody did anything back when there was the opportunity to do something.

Where were these people and their complaint back in the 1970s and 1980s?

The Redskins will change their name when ticket and/or merchandise sales fail because of it. That's it.

Has Obama made another snide remark about how the Redskins should change their name?

Flack wrote:The Redskins will change their name when ticket and/or merchandise sales fail because of it. That's it.

You got it exactly correct, and personally I don't think the vast majority of the fans give a shit one way or the other, it's some overly sensitive political correctness types who are whining about it.

These people need to vagina up.

(I would normally say they need to man up and grow some balls, only balls are very sensitive to being hit and it hurts. Vaginas are designed to take a pounding and its owner generally loves it.)

THE TDARCOS FILES

On Women...

Tdarcos wrote:Vaginas are designed to take a pounding and its owner generally loves it.

pinback wrote:THE TDARCOS FILES

On Women...

Tdarcos wrote:Vaginas are designed to take a pounding and its owner generally loves it.

Well, am I correct? Not to be personal, Pinhead, but isn't this what you and your wife do, and, I presume, she likes what you do to her when you do this, true or false?

What is the point here? Am I correct, or am I incorrect?

What does this have to do with the Washington football team?



THE
THEY'RE
NOT PINKSKINS
AARDVARK

AArdvark wrote:What does this have to do with the Washington football team?

I have no idea either, and I don't know why Pinback raised the issue in the first place.

I apologize. I shouldn't have brought it up.

Please stay on topic, Pinback.

Yeah, pinkskin.

Flack wrote:Yeah, pinkskin.

At least you didn't sing "Play that Funky Music white boy."

Submit your best replacement names for the Redskins in this very thread!

"Apples."

If you want something less offensive, then go with "Red n!33rs."