No, not really. I couldn't resist that title though.

We've actually blogged about the mess with the Washington Team Formerly Registered As ("f/r/a") the Redskins far too many times—but they won't stay out of the news–so here goes again. The short version is that several Native Americans petitioned the United States Patent and Trademark Office last yearto have the Redskins' federal trademarks cancelled because the trademarks were disparaging, and they succeeded. The f/r/a Redskins then had two appeal options from that loss. Under 15 U.S.C. 1071, the registrant can appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or turn around andsue the parties that cancelled the registrations in a Civil Action in Federal District Court. The f/r/a Redskins decided to sue the Native Americans because this allowed them to bring in additional claims that would not have been allowed on appeal.

They sued for the followingrulings:

  1. REDSKINS is not disparaging.
  2. REDSKINS does not causedisrepute or contempt.
  3. the trademark act violates the team's right to free speech .
  4. section 2(a) of the trademark act is void because "disparaging" is vague.
  5. the cancellation of REDSKINS violated the team's right to due process.
  6. the cancellation of REDSKINSamounted to a governmental taking of property.
  7. that the trademarks had been around too long for people to complain anymore.

The District Court held (these are the highlights anyway):

  1. REDSKINS is disparaging as evidenced by dictionary evidence, literary, scholarly, and media references, and statements from affected individuals.
  2. Same as previous.
  3. first amendment doesn't apply, and trademarkregistration is government speech, sofree speech doesn't apply.
  4. the trademark act isn't really vague, it gives fair warning of what is impermissible, and doesn't encourage discriminatoryenforcement.
  5. due process is not violated because a trademark registration is not considered property under the 5th amendment.
  6. cancellation is not a property taking because a trademark registration is not considered property under the 5th amendment.
  7. this type of claim can't bebarred by laches because it is a question ofpublic interest.

It'll be appealed, but the f/r/a Redskins arenow 2-0.

John Oliver had this to say about the topic last year (Warning: F bomb toward the end):

The lawyers at Trademarkology provide trademark registration services backed by the experience and service of one of the nation's oldest law firms. Click here to begin the process of protecting your brand name with a federally registered trademark.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.