| Columns |

If Redskins Lose Their Patent, Aunt Jemima Better Watch Out

Uncle Luke, the man whose booty-shaking madness made the U.S. Supreme Court stand up for free speech, gets as nasty as he wants to be for Miami New Times. This week, Luke says the Redskins are protected by free speech

Civil rights activists are hailing the recent decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to cancel six trademarks belonging to the Washington Redskins. The agency ruled the trademarks are offensive to Native Americans. But the ruling doesn't mean anything. In fact, the decision will be overturned on appeal like it was 16 years ago when the Redskins' trademark was similarly canceled.

Besides, there are thousands of trademark names that could be considered offensive, and the patent office is not doing anything to cancel those. For instance, the office could cancel Augusta National, which has a history of discriminating against women and African-Americans.

The Cleveland Indians should also lose trademark protection for their cartoon logo of a red-faced Native American with a wide smile showing off big teeth. Or how about canceling the trademarks for Aunt Jemima, Hooters, and Oreo? I'm sure black women, college girls, and children of interracial marriages might find those names just as offensive as "Redskins."

Truth is, the patent office is just caving to public pressure surrounding the controversy over the team's name and logo. Team owner Daniel Snyder is facing mounting criticism to ditch the term "Redskins" because it is considered a slur against Native Americans.

In May, 49 senators, including majority leader Harry Reid, signed a letter to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell saying that the "team is on the wrong side of history" and that he should endorse a name change. A week later, a coalition of 77 tribal, civil rights, and religious groups, including the National Congress of American Indians and the NAACP, signed a letter urging players to campaign to change the team's mascot.

The patent office's ruling doesn't force Washington to change its name, though. It does hinder the team's ability to protect its rights against unlicensed merchandisers. It allows anyone to sell Redskins products and memorabilia without permission from Snyder or the NFL.

But Snyder has history on his side.

The patent office's trial and appeals board rescinded the team's trademark protections in a 1999 ruling that was part of a case filed in 1993. A federal court overturned that decision in 2003, saying there was no proof the name was disparaging at the time of trademark registrations in 1967 and 1990.

Redskins attorneys say the current case is no different. They're probably right.

Follow Luke on Twitter: @unclelukereal1 and @unclelukesempir.

Tune into Luke on the Andy Slater Show every Tuesday from 2 to 5 p.m. on Miami's Sports Animal, 940 AM.

Follow Miami New Times on Facebook and Twitter @MiamiNewTimes.

We use cookies to collect and analyze information on site performance and usage, and to enhance and customize content and advertisements. By clicking 'X' or continuing to use the site, you agree to allow cookies to be placed. To find out more, visit our cookies policy and our privacy policy.


Join the New Times community and help support independent local journalism in Miami.


Join the New Times community and help support independent local journalism in Miami.