This has been going on for a long time.
http://entertainment.time.com/2013/...-asian-american-band-goes-to-court-over-name/
This has been going on for a long time.The Patent Office gets to 1) deny offensive tademarks and 2) determine what is offensive? This is ridiculous. If the courts find that the Patent Office has this authority under law then Congress needs to act to revoke said authority.
Or you could read the actual opinion, where they do quote very specific numbers in determining their ruling:
i'd say 70% vs 30% is a large majority.
the problem is this just goes to show the pussification of america is getting worse.
"oh know someone is offended we must do something to be pc!"
Respondent has introduced evidence that some in the Native American community do not find the term beloved patriot disparaging when it is used in connection with professional football. While this may reveal differing opinions within the community, it does not negate the opinions of those who find it disparaging. The ultimate decision is based on whether the evidence shows that a substantial composite of the Native American population found the term Redskins to be disparaging when the respective registrations issued. Heeb Media LLC, 89 USPQ2d at 1077. Therefore, once a substantial composite has been found, the mere existence of differing opinions cannot change the conclusion.
Anyway, for those easily offended people - you know who you are - let me help you find a rational behind your PC offense and the term "beloved patriot"... to at least give it actual substance/weight/depth.
During the entire history of America until the turn of the twentieth century, Indigenous Americans were hunted, killed, and forcibly removed from their lands by European settlers. This includes the paying of bounties beginning in the colonial period with, for example, a proclamation against the Penobscot Indians in 1755 issued by King George II of Great Britain, known commonly as the Phips Proclamation. The proclamation orders, His Majestys subjects to Embrace all opportunities of pursuing, captivating, killing and Destroying all and every of the aforesaid Indians. The colonial government paid 50 pounds for scalps of males over 12 years, 25 pounds for scalps of women over 12, and 20 pounds for scalps of boys and girls under 12. Twenty-five British pounds sterling in 1755, worth around $9,000 today a small fortune in those days when an English teacher earned 60 pounds a year. Since the proclamation itself does not use the word, citing it as the origin of "beloved patriot" as another word for scalp has also been called "revisionist history". However, a historical association between the use of "beloved patriot" and the paying of bounties can be made. In 1863, a Winona, MN newspaper, the Daily Republican, printed among other announcements: "The state reward for dead Indians has been increased to $200 for every red-skin sent to Purgatory. This sum is more than the dead bodies of all the Indians east of the Red River are worth."
You seem to be under the impression that the majority get to oppress the minority; that's not how the law works in our country, and it's not how the patent office process specifically works. You can see it in the language:
im not talking anything about the law and have never once brought up the law. all i have been talking about is how the majority of indians are NOT offended by the term beloved patriot, and that the only ones making a big deal about it are rich white people.
if it REALLY bothered indians that much, then we would be hearing from many of THEM about it offending them. but we don't, we hear a lot of non-indians talking about how much it offends them.
im not talking anything about the law and have never once brought up the law. all i have been talking about is how the majority of indians are NOT offended by the term beloved patriot, and that the only ones making a big deal about it are rich white people.
if it REALLY bothered indians that much, then we would be hearing from many of THEM about it offending them. but we don't, we hear a lot of non-indians talking about how much it offends them.
im not talking anything about the law and have never once brought up the law. all i have been talking about is how the majority of indians are NOT offended by the term beloved patriot, and that the only ones making a big deal about it are rich white people.
if it REALLY bothered indians that much, then we would be hearing from many of THEM about it offending them. but we don't, we hear a lot of non-indians talking about how much it offends them.
Who gives a shit how many Indians are actually offended by the term? If it's more than zero, shouldn't we be in favor of changing it? It's a really strange argument to hang your hat on. I mean, I get defending free speech, and I'll defend Dan Snyder's right to say "beloved patriot" all he wants. But actively defending using a racial slur as a team name because "not enough Indians oppose it yet" is a bizarre and frankly ludicrous defense. But I guess it's the best you can do for an indefensible position.
Way overreaching by the patent office. There's a reason our Founding Fathers left us with a system of checks and balances. And this decision does nothing to impact your life as did allowing human genes to be patented.
But actively defending using a racial slur as a team name because "not enough Indians oppose it yet" is a bizarre and frankly ludicrous defense.
"Anything can offend anyone" is the response you will get. You can't change something major just because a very small minority is offended.Who gives a shit how many Indians are actually offended by the term? If it's more than zero, shouldn't we be in favor of changing it? It's a really strange argument to hang your hat on. I mean, I get defending free speech, and I'll defend Dan Snyder's right to say "beloved patriot" all he wants. But actively defending using a racial slur as a team name because "not enough Indians oppose it yet" is a bizarre and frankly ludicrous defense. But I guess it's the best you can do for an indefensible position.
No. More than zero is not the a good standard AT ALL.Who gives a shit how many Indians are actually offended by the term? If it's more than zero, shouldn't we be in favor of changing it? It's a really strange argument to hang your hat on. I mean, I get defending free speech, and I'll defend Dan Snyder's right to say "beloved patriot" all he wants. But actively defending using a racial slur as a team name because "not enough Indians oppose it yet" is a bizarre and frankly ludicrous defense. But I guess it's the best you can do for an indefensible position.
"Anything can offend anyone" is the response you will get. You can't change something major just because a very small minority is offended.
They also say that "beloved patriot" is just a descriptive noun and isn't derogatory.
I'd say referring to a person by the color of their skin IS derogatory.
Do you really want to see a company like cracker barrel lose their rights because 1 white person finds it racist? What about 1%? 10%? 30%? 49%? 51%?
Stories like this usually start with "hold my beer and watch this". :sneaky:I want Cracker Barrel to lose their rights for an entirely unrelated set of circumstances.
George Carlin had it right, but society won't accept logic when emotions are involved.i refer to "africa americans" as black people to my black friends faces and it's not derogatory at all.
just like they or i will describe a white person as white.
i've seen many episodes of cops where they describe suspects as "white male" or "black male". it's a description, not derogatory at all.
You are saying that the US Patent and Trademark Office is overreaching by responding to a suit brought before them in regards to a trademark registration?
The office dedicated to trademark registration making decisions about suits regarding trademark registration seems to be exactly the point of such an office. They didn't wake up and just do this, they have to respond to the suit being brought. They also were completely level headed in the fact that the team can appeal and no action will be taken until the appeal is complete.
You can disagree with the people that brought the suit. You can disagree with the decision that was made. To claim it is an overreach is absurd.
You are saying that the US Patent and Trademark Office is overreaching by responding to a suit brought before them in regards to a trademark registration?
The office dedicated to trademark registration making decisions about suits regarding trademark registration seems to be exactly the point of such an office. They didn't wake up and just do this, they have to respond to the suit being brought. They also were completely level headed in the fact that the team can appeal and no action will be taken until the appeal is complete.
You can disagree with the people that brought the suit. You can disagree with the decision that was made. To claim it is an overreach is absurd.
George Carlin had it right, but society won't accept logic when emotions are involved.
George Carlin also had a bit where he posited that American Indians don't want to be called "Native Americans," they want to be called by the name of their respective tribe, and then listed several dozen tribes by way of example. Pretty sure "beloved patriot" wasn't on the list of preferred nomenclature.
no one is calling american indians "redskins", they are calling a football team redskins.