USPTO Cancels Washington Redskins Trademarks Citing Disparagement of Native Americans

In a landmark decision issued on June 18, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) canceled several trademarks held by the Washington Redskins football team, concluding that the team’s name is disparaging to Native Americans. The ruling was issued by a 2-1 vote from the independent tribunal within the USPTO.

The case originated in 2006 when five Native Americans representing four tribes filed a petition challenging the trademarks on the grounds that the term "Redskins" is offensive. The TTAB clarified that its mandate was to determine whether the trademark was disparaging to the referenced group, not the general U.S. population.

The decision specifically affects trademarks registered between 1967 and 1990 and does not include the current Redskins logo. The board found "a preponderance of evidence that a substantial amount of Native Americans found the term Redskins to be disparaging when used in connection with professional football." The ruling acknowledged differing opinions within the Native American community but emphasized that such differences do not negate the disparaging nature recognized by many.

While the ruling does not compel the National Football League (NFL) or team owner Daniel Snyder to change the team’s name, it strips federal trademark protections from the affected registrations if the decision is upheld on appeal. Without these protections, the team could face challenges in enforcing its trademarks.

Bob Raskopf, the Redskins’ trademark attorney, announced the team’s intention to appeal the ruling. He expressed confidence that the courts would overturn the TTAB’s decision, citing a similar 1999 case where the board initially canceled the trademarks but a federal district court later reversed the cancellation on procedural grounds. Raskopf noted, "The evidence in the current claim is virtually identical to the evidence a federal judge decided was insufficient more than ten years ago. We expect the same ultimate outcome here."

The 1999 case was dismissed because the plaintiffs were deemed too late in filing their complaint, as the team had registered the nickname in 1967. The current case, however, was brought by a younger group of Native Americans and heard by the TTAB in March 2013.

The legal challenge is based on a federal statute that prohibits registration of trademarks that are disparaging, scandalous, contemptuous, or disreputable. The plaintiffs argued that the Redskins name falls within this prohibition.

Political figures have weighed in on the ruling. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) expressed support for the TTAB’s decision and predicted it would be upheld on appeal. She stated, "This puts a big dent in their business model of trying to gain revenue from a disparaging term of slur. I find it very unlikely that someone is going to overrule the patent office on this. This is a huge decision by a federal agency."

Cantwell, alongside Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, previously led a letter signed by 49 Democratic senators urging the Redskins to change their name. Cantwell indicated that if the team and the NFL refuse to comply, Congress has several options, including potentially revoking the league’s tax-exempt status.

Reid has publicly declared he will not attend Redskins home games until the team changes its name, emphasizing the moral imperative behind the issue. He remarked, "Daniel Snyder may be the last person in the world to realize this, but it's just a matter of time until he is forced to do the right thing and change the name."

Representatives of Native American organizations also responded to the ruling. Ray Halbritter of the Oneida Indian Nation and Jackie Pata, executive director of the National Congress of American Indians, issued a joint statement: "The U.S. Patent Office has now restated the obvious truth that Native Americans, civil rights leaders, athletes, religious groups, state legislative bodies, Members of Congress and the president have all echoed: taxpayer resources cannot be used to help private companies profit off the promotion of dictionary defined racial slurs."

They further expressed hope that the ruling would compel the Redskins and the NFL to cease using what they described as a "hateful slur," highlighting the financial implications for the team’s billionaire owner if the trademarks remain canceled.

The case remains pending appeal in the U.S. District Court, with the Redskins’ trademark registrations remaining valid during the appellate process. The outcome of this legal battle could have significant implications for trademark law, sports branding, and the ongoing debate over the use of Native American imagery and names in professional sports.