Recently, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal from the NFL’s Washington Redskins to reverse a ruling that canceled the team’s trademarks. According to Yahoo Sports, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ruled the Redskins’ registered trademark images were to be canceled because they violated Section 2(a) of the Lanham Trademark Act of 1946 which states that the trademark may “disparage persons or bring them into contempt or disrepute.”
Specifically, the law is intended to ban registered trademarks deemed offensive – in this case, the Redskins logo disparages Native Americans. The appeal was particularly interesting because the NFL team requested the Supreme Court hear the case prior to a federal appeals court’s decision.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court recently announced it will hear a similar case involving The Slants, an Asian American band that was denied trademark due to the offensive nature of its name. Sports Illustrated reported this decision by the Court prompted the Redskins to appeal to the high court to hear both cases together. If the Court were to rule in favor of The Slants, and conclude that there was a violation of the band’s First Amendment rights by the law, it would also be a win for the Redskins’ case.
The Redskins’ case is similar to The Slants
The recent background of the case comes from the fact that in 2015, a federal judge upheld the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s 2014 decision against the Redskins. Yahoo Sports noted this led the Redskins to form alliances with various free speech activist groups, one of which included The Slants.
As an Asian American band led by Simon Tam, the group wants to trademark the use of “slants”, which is a slang term for Asians. So far, Tam has been successful in his appeals as he won a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that ruled banning attempts to trademark “slants” was in direct violation of First Amendment rights. At which point, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office requested the Supreme Court hear the case.
In short, if the Supreme Court upholds the federal appeals court’s decision for The Slants, it will cancel out the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s previous decision on the Redskins.
The potential ramifications of losing its brand
The team is particularly adamant about this case due to the potential financial ramifications. Bloomberg BNA found that if the Redskins lost rights to their brand, it could cost the team upwards of $200 million. Currently, the Redskins rank as the fifth most profitable brand in the NFL among 32 teams at $2.95 billion. However, only $214 million of that value stems from the brand, which could mean that the team would effectively take a substantial hit to its brand revenue without the Redskins name.
Do you have any questions? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Anthony Caruso, at 201-806-3364.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
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 […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
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 […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
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, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
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 […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
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 […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
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 […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
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.
The Redskins Continue to Fight for the Trademark Use of its Brand
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Recently, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal from the NFL’s Washington Redskins to reverse a ruling that canceled the team’s trademarks. According to Yahoo Sports, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ruled the Redskins’ registered trademark images were to be canceled because they violated Section 2(a) of the Lanham Trademark Act of 1946 which states that the trademark may “disparage persons or bring them into contempt or disrepute.”
Specifically, the law is intended to ban registered trademarks deemed offensive – in this case, the Redskins logo disparages Native Americans. The appeal was particularly interesting because the NFL team requested the Supreme Court hear the case prior to a federal appeals court’s decision.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court recently announced it will hear a similar case involving The Slants, an Asian American band that was denied trademark due to the offensive nature of its name. Sports Illustrated reported this decision by the Court prompted the Redskins to appeal to the high court to hear both cases together. If the Court were to rule in favor of The Slants, and conclude that there was a violation of the band’s First Amendment rights by the law, it would also be a win for the Redskins’ case.
The Redskins’ case is similar to The Slants
The recent background of the case comes from the fact that in 2015, a federal judge upheld the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s 2014 decision against the Redskins. Yahoo Sports noted this led the Redskins to form alliances with various free speech activist groups, one of which included The Slants.
As an Asian American band led by Simon Tam, the group wants to trademark the use of “slants”, which is a slang term for Asians. So far, Tam has been successful in his appeals as he won a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that ruled banning attempts to trademark “slants” was in direct violation of First Amendment rights. At which point, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office requested the Supreme Court hear the case.
In short, if the Supreme Court upholds the federal appeals court’s decision for The Slants, it will cancel out the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s previous decision on the Redskins.
The potential ramifications of losing its brand
The team is particularly adamant about this case due to the potential financial ramifications. Bloomberg BNA found that if the Redskins lost rights to their brand, it could cost the team upwards of $200 million. Currently, the Redskins rank as the fifth most profitable brand in the NFL among 32 teams at $2.95 billion. However, only $214 million of that value stems from the brand, which could mean that the team would effectively take a substantial hit to its brand revenue without the Redskins name.
Do you have any questions? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Anthony Caruso, at 201-806-3364.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
