Redskins Appeal Trademark Decision on Franchise Name

chief-zee2Not only has Washington Redskins Daniel Snyder insisted he would not change the name of his NFL team, on Thursday the franchise formally appealed a ruling that stripped the team of trademark protection, the latest legal maneuver in the Redskins’ attempt to defend its name against those who consider it a racial slur.

The team announced that it had filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, and that it ”points out the many errors” in the decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

The office’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board voted 2-1 on June 18 to cancel six uses of ”Redskins” trademarked from 1967 to 1990, saying the name is ”disparaging of Native Americans.”

”We believe that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ignored both federal case law and the weight of the evidence, and we look forward to having a federal court review this obviously flawed decision,” Redskins lawyer Bob Raskopf said in the team’s statement.

The team had previously said it would appeal the ruling and had two months to do so. The trademark protection remains in place while the matter makes its way through the courts, a process that could take years. A similar ruling by the trademark board in 1999 was overturned on a technicality in 2003. Native Americans have been challenging the trademark since 1992.

The Redskins say they will ask the court to consider ”serious constitutional issues,” including whether the ruling penalizes the team’s right of free speech and whether the team has been unfairly deprived of ”valuable and long-held intellectual property rights.”

The group of five Native Americans challenging the name is equally confident.

”This effort is doomed to fail,” said Amanda Blackhorse, the lead plaintiff. ”But if they want to prolong this litigation, which has already gone on for 22 years, I guess they have that prerogative.”

The Redskins have been under sustained pressure to defend the name over the last 18 months, with major political, church and sports figures joining the debate and saying it should be changed.

Team owner Snyder has vowed never to change the name, calling it a ”badge of honor.”

”If people wouldn’t dare call a Native American a ‘redskin’ because they know it is offensive, how can an NFL football team have this name?” Blackhorse said. ”We know that time is on our side for a change in the team’s name, and we are confident we will win once again at this stage of the litigation.”

Democracy needs journalism it can trust.

This election season, the stakes are higher than usual — and so is the pressure on newsrooms to soften their coverage, stay quiet, or just disappear. Independent reporting, the kind that answers to readers instead of advertisers or political pressure, matters more in a moment like this, not less.

For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed independent and reader-funded. We have no corporate owner and no shareholders telling us what to cover or how to cover it. That independence is also our biggest vulnerability: nothing protects it except readers choosing to fund it directly.

Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under in a moment like this, it's rarely the independent, reader-funded ones that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top