Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: October 18, 2013
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comWhile Oneida Indian Nation has claimed the name is degrading and racist, sports law analysts argue that it will likely be quiet trademark lawsuits that affect whether the team chooses to change its name.
Daniel Snyder, who purchased the Redskins in 1999, has noted that he will never change the team’s name.
“That tradition – the song, the cheer – it mattered so much to me as a child, and I know it matters to every other Redskins fan in the D.C. area and across the nation,” said Snyder, according to New York Daily News. “Our past isn’t just where we came from – it’s who we are.”
However, during that year, a suit filed by a Native American tribe prompted the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to cancel six trademark registrations held by the Redskins, essentially eliminating any benefits of owning these trademarks, Forbes explained.
While the suit was eventually overturned and the trademarks restored, a similar case – Blackhorse v. Pro-Football – is currently being deliberated by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. The suit alleges similar claims of racism regarding the team’s name and urges the board to cancel its trademarks as a result. The potential monetary loss that could result if the team’s trademarks are indeed canceled may be costly enough to push Snyder into changing the Redskins name, the analysis suggests. However, Snyder himself has not weighed on how the outcome of the case will impact his decision.
Additionally, legal teams attempting to prove that the Redskins name is, in fact, disparaging and carries racist undertones may be somewhat challenging, especially without widespread support from other Native American tribes. A representative for the team recently cited a 2004 study from the Annenberg Institute, which found that 9 out of 10 Native Americans polled were not bothered by the name “Washington Redskins,” according to NBC Sports.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
While Oneida Indian Nation has claimed the name is degrading and racist, sports law analysts argue that it will likely be quiet trademark lawsuits that affect whether the team chooses to change its name.
Daniel Snyder, who purchased the Redskins in 1999, has noted that he will never change the team’s name.
“That tradition – the song, the cheer – it mattered so much to me as a child, and I know it matters to every other Redskins fan in the D.C. area and across the nation,” said Snyder, according to New York Daily News. “Our past isn’t just where we came from – it’s who we are.”
However, during that year, a suit filed by a Native American tribe prompted the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board to cancel six trademark registrations held by the Redskins, essentially eliminating any benefits of owning these trademarks, Forbes explained.
While the suit was eventually overturned and the trademarks restored, a similar case – Blackhorse v. Pro-Football – is currently being deliberated by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. The suit alleges similar claims of racism regarding the team’s name and urges the board to cancel its trademarks as a result. The potential monetary loss that could result if the team’s trademarks are indeed canceled may be costly enough to push Snyder into changing the Redskins name, the analysis suggests. However, Snyder himself has not weighed on how the outcome of the case will impact his decision.
Additionally, legal teams attempting to prove that the Redskins name is, in fact, disparaging and carries racist undertones may be somewhat challenging, especially without widespread support from other Native American tribes. A representative for the team recently cited a 2004 study from the Annenberg Institute, which found that 9 out of 10 Native Americans polled were not bothered by the name “Washington Redskins,” according to NBC Sports.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!