The 2013 NFL season was not kind to the Washington Redskins, and after winning only 3 games and losing 13, there are many in the Washington Redskins organization who might have wanted to hide behind a new name. Now they might have to.
The USPTO officially cancelled the Washington Redskins trademark registration stating that the team’s name is offensive to Native Americans. Although it is unusual for the trademark office to take such action, this move is consistent with the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure, Section 1203.01, as well as Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, which provide that trademarks which disparage or belittle any group are not permitted to be registered under federal law.
Although the cancellation of a federal trademark registration does not mean that the Washington Redskins must stop using their name, cancellation of their trademark might significantly reduce the overall value of the team. A significant source of revenue for most professional sports teams comes from the sale of a variety of licensed products bearing the team name and logo. Ownership of a valid and enforceable trademark registration in connection with this name and logo helps a sports team to control this intellectual property, license it, and otherwise exclude other parties from profiting through unlicensed use of the marks. Cancellation of the federal registration will remove a significant number of enforcement tools available to the Washington Redskins, rendering it potentially more difficult to exclude others from using their marks.
Periodically the Trademark Office receives applications for registration, or complaints about an already registered mark, which contain “immoral, deceptive or scandalous matter” or is disparaging to “people, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols.” Although it is a somewhat rarely cited basis for the rejection or cancellation of a trademark, the Washington Redskins join a dubious list of marks that have run afoul of this provision. For example, in 2012, the Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Office’s rejection of a trademark application covering the rather graphic name of a rooster shaped lollipop product, on the grounds that the name affixed to this particular product was “immoral or scandalous.”
Yet in a different case, the Old Glory Condom Corporation was granted a federal trademark registration in connection with American flag-adorned condom packages. The apparent discrepancy between this outcome and the Redskins or lollipops highlights the seemingly impossible task faced by the Trademark Office – to discern what type of mark might be “immoral or scandalous” or otherwise offensive to members of the public, while considering the fact that what is vulgar to one person often is not in the eyes of another.
In light of the significant number of protestations received from Native American communities across the country, and a growing public concern about the use of a racial slur such as “Redskins” for the name of a professional sports team, the Trademark Office’s decision in this case likely was easier than debating about lollipops or condoms. Now that they have tackled the Redskins, perhaps the Trademark Office will knock Chief Wahoo of the Cleveland Indians out of the park.