In The News Today...

Quote: chickenman

Quote: Beethoven

IRS tells Congress 6 more emails missing in tea party probe

This is getting ridiculous, but nothing will happen unless the American people wake up. Unfortunately, with so many LIV's out there, that may never happen.

Really, really have to suspend my disbelief to think that emails disappear as claimed. PST not backed up? Lame. Nothing on the server? No archive policy? No senders/recipients in the thread? WTF were they, emails to herself? Geez.

To add to this about retention policies, I remember a lecture back in college on the subject. What caught Oliver North and others was a new email retention policy. Someone somewhere changed the retention from a few weeks to several months. Remember, this is 30 years ago when email was new and policies were just being formed. To think the IRS doesn't have back-ups of back-ups blows the mind.

Of course a smart person doing something illegal would not use the office email. They would use a personal account and never, ever use the work computer lest it be being watched. As we know, few are this smart, anywhere.

Quote: RonC

Emails don't just disappear...

No but people who don't make emails disappear can disappear very easily.

U.S. Patent Office cancels trademark registrations for NFL’s Washington Redskins

This is the type of stuff that liberals care about. Forget Benghazi, Ukraine, Iraq, or any of the numerous Obama scandals.

(And people wonder why America is going down the toilet... *facepalm*)

Quote: Beethoven

U.S. Patent Office cancels trademark registrations for NFL’s Washington Redskins

This is the type of stuff that liberals care about. Forget Benghazi, Ukraine, Iraq, or any of the numerous Obama scandals.

(And people wonder why America is going down the toilet... *facepalm*)

It is a sad day for the USA. A private business has had its property taken by federal looters just because some people do not like the name. If you don't like the name, don't buy tickets or merchandise and don't watch. I hope when the Feds go to deliver the order they carry a pistol like the common thieves they are.

Does this just mean that all those illegal, knockoff, Chinese made, counterfeit jerseys now aren't illegal? What does "losing a trademark" entail?

Quote: Face

Does this just mean that all those illegal, knockoff, Chinese made, counterfeit jerseys now aren't illegal? What does "losing a trademark" entail?

The team will appeal and until the appeal is heard so don't try making any jerseys to sell.

The team retained the Indian Head logo which was not part of the suit.

If this looting, er decision holds up then it would mean anyone could use the name "Washington Redskins" or presumably "Redskins." (I doubt you can trademark a city name in general.) So if someone wanted to open an restaurant featuring Navajo dishes and Indian Fry Bread in Tempe they could call it "Redskins Fry Bread" complete with Red and Gold trim.

The team gets to keep using the name but with the added benefit that the stadium will soon be a liberal-free zone.

Quote: AZDuffman

It is a sad day for the USA. A private business has had its property taken by federal looters just because some people do not like the name.

Under the Lanham Act of 1946, the federal government is not allowed to register trademarks that “disparage” any “persons,” “institutions,” or “beliefs.”

Surely grassroots conservatives could convince Congress to amend the Lanham Act. Football is enormously popular in the U.S., so Congressional Republicans would have the upper hand, politically. It could be an easy win for the GOP. Obama still might veto the bill, but it's worth a fight. The alternative is to just whine about political correctness. Are Congressional Republicans a bunch of impotent doormats, or do they have some fight in them? Maybe the problem is Boehner. Gingrich wouldn't just whine about it, he'd actually get off his butt and do something.

By the way, even if Snyder loses his appeal with the U.S. Patent Office, Mr. Snyder can continue to call his team whatever name he wants, he just won't be able to use federal courts to sue retailers who sell unauthorized Redskins merchandise. He can still sue those same retailers in state courts, though it would be cumbersome, and he'd waste a lot of money on lawyers. (He doesn't seem to mind wasting money on lawyers though.)

Quote: reno

Under the Lanham Act of 1946, the federal government is not allowed to register trademarks that “disparage” any “persons,” “institutions,” or “beliefs.”

I am aware of the bill, but the team should have a good case that after 60 years or more the statute of limitations to raise an objection should have passed. A SCOTUS that reads the Constitution (ie: not what 5 of the members are now) would probably throw out such a law on First Amendment grounds.

Quote:

Are Congressional Republicans a bunch of impotent doormats, or do they have some fight in them? Maybe the problem is Boehner. Gingrich wouldn't just whine about it, he'd actually get off his butt and do something.

The Tea Party has fight, the rest too much enjoy the party scene and their suites at the Watergate.

Quote:

By the way, even if Snyder loses his appeal with the U.S. Patent Office, Mr. Snyder can continue to call his team whatever name he wants, he just won't be able to use federal courts to sue retailers who sell unauthorized Redskins merchandise. He can still sue those same retailers in state courts, though it would be cumbersome, and he'd waste a lot of money on lawyers. (He doesn't seem to mind wasting money on lawyers though.)

The logo, the most valuable part of it, is still his and he can still sue over its use. The USA needs more Snyders.

Quote: AZDuffman

A SCOTUS that reads the Constitution (ie: not what 5 of the members are now) would probably throw out such a law on First Amendment grounds.

Wrong. That's like arguing that the 1st Amendment protects offensive words on car license plates. Nope. Most states will reject a vanity license plate that says something offensive, and no one has ever successfully sued the DMV for infringement of free speech. Same with the U.S. Patent Office. The 1st Amendment won't protect license plate offensive words or trademarked/patented offensive words.

Quote: reno

Wrong. That's like arguing that the 1st Amendment protects offensive words on car license plates. Nope. Most states will reject a vanity license plate that says something offensive, and no one has ever successfully sued the DMV for infringement of free speech. Same with the U.S. Patent Office. The 1st Amendment won't protect license plate offensive words or trademarked/patented offensive words.

Not quite the same thing. Lets look at the quote again:

Quote:

Under the Lanham Act of 1946, the federal government is not allowed to register trademarks that “disparage” any “persons,” “institutions,” or “beliefs.”

This is very broad. For starters the First Amendment allows (for now) you to disparage government, that is an institution. In "Falwell v Flynt" the SCOTUS said you can disparage a person. Additionally the Redskins can sue to say that the Trademark once granted has passed the threshold as it has been approved so must stand.

This ruling is nothing more than all the other activist court and judge nonsense we have had since the 1960s.

The Indians who sued for this should be very careful what they wish for as next will be Chiefs and Braves. Then Indian names will disappear from more and more things all in the idea "not to offend." Eventually the tribes will be forgotten entirely.