Go Redskins!
Are Indians more easily offended than Greeks? Where is Lenny Bruce when we need him?
HI-
Thanks for
the help. The item’s below. I’d be happy to mail you a copy,
if you give me a mailing address.
Claude
Solnik
(631)
913-4244
Long
Island
Business News
2150
Smithtown Ave.
Ronkonkoma, NY 11779-7348
Home > LI
Confidential > Stop
scratching on holidays
Stop scratching on holidays
Published: June 1, 2012
Off Track Betting in New York State has been racing into a crisis called shrinking revenue. Some people have spitballed a solution: Don’t close on holidays.
New York State Racing Law bars racing on Christmas, Easter and Palm Sunday, and the state has ruled OTBs can’t handle action on those days, even though they could easily broadcast races from out of state.
“You should be able to bet whenever you want,” said Jackson Leeds, a Nassau OTB employee who makes an occasional bet. He added some irrefutable logic: “How is the business going to make money if you’re not open to take people’s bets?”
Elias Tsekerides, president of the Federation of Hellenic Societies of Greater New York, said OTB is open on Greek Orthodox Easter and Palm Sunday.
“I don’t want discrimination,” Tsekerides said. “They close for the Catholics, but open for the Greek Orthodox? It’s either open for all or not open.”
OTB officials have said they lose millions by closing on Palm Sunday alone, with tracks such as Gulfstream, Santa Anita, Turf Paradise and Hawthorne running.
One option: OTBs could just stay open and face the consequences. New York City OTB did just that back in 2003. The handle was about $1.5 million – and OTB was fined $5,000.
Easy money.
U.S. News
U.S. Patent Office Cancels Washington Redskins Trademarks
Federal Agency Rules Redskins Name Disparages Native Americans
Updated June 18, 2014 8:26 p.m. ET
The Redskins play the New York Giants in 2013.
Getty Images
A federal agency withdrew trademark
protection for the Washington Redskins because it said the nickname is
an insult to Native Americans, threatening millions of dollars the team
and the National Football League make from merchandise and sponsorships.
A
three-judge panel at the Patent & Trademark Office ruled 2-1 that
the name wasn't worthy of federal trademark protection. The decision
could escalate the campaign against a brand that the NFL and team owner
Daniel M. Snyder
have vigorously defended against increasingly strident criticism.
Stripping away trademark protection
could dent the sport's lucrative licensing business and could make it
harder to defend against counterfeit products. The appeal of the
decision, however, could delay any potential effect for years.
The Washington Redskins' trademark on its name has been
cancelled for being "disparaging to Native Americans," but the team
believes ithe name is here to stay. Zeughauser Group's Kent Zimmermann
joins the News Hub with his analysis. Photo: Getty
At a minimum, it is likely to further
inflame a debate over the name of one of the most venerable sports
franchises in the country and one that has been part of the capital's
fabric since the 1930s. Over the past year, politicians including
President
Barack Obama
have weighed in on the matter, and several major media outlets have called on the team to abandon the nickname.
Photos: The Washington Redskins' Canceled Trademarks
- Redskin Ruling a Sales Opportunity?
- If the Redskins Go, Who Else Follows?
- Beyond Redskins: A History of Offensive Trademarks
- Democrats Hail Trademark Ruling
- Redskins Attorney Responds to Trademark Ruling
- Readers: What Would You Call the Redskins?
- Capital Journal Daybreak: Receive the Journal's morning rundown in your inbox
Mr. Snyder says it is an expression
of respect and admiration to Native Americans. Robert Raskopf, a
trademark attorney for the team, said the Redskins will appeal
Wednesday's decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, a part of
the PTO.
"We've seen this story before,"
said Mr. Raskopf. "And just like last time, today's ruling will have no
effect at all on the team's ownership of and right to use the Redskins
name and logo."
The office made a similar ruling in regard to the Redskins in 1999 that was later thrown out on technical grounds.
The
long-term impact of the decision won't be clear for months, if not
years, while the case is being appealed, but some legal experts say the
decision is still a worrisome one for the team.
"You
wouldn't invest in a company without a federal trademark, and I don't
think moving forward without one is tenable for the team," said
Christine Haight Farley, a trademark expert and professor at American
University Washington College of Law.
Joseph D. Lewis, a trademark attorney
with Barnes & Thornburg LLP in Washington, D.C., said the trademark
ruling could also encourage further challenges to teams with
Indian-themed names or mascots.
The NFL
could potentially force a name change, but NFL Commissioner Roger
Goodell repeatedly has said that the name wasn't meant to be offensive.
In January, Mr. Goodell said, "this is…a football team that's had that
name for 80 years and has presented the name in a way that it has
honored Native Americans."
The PTO, part
of the Department of Commerce, issues patents and registers trademarks
for inventors and businesses. Under federal law, the U.S. government may
refuse to register a trademark that disparages a "substantial
composite" of a group.
The judges on
Wednesday cited dictionary definitions that labeled the word "often
offensive." They also relied on a 21-year-old anti-Redskins resolution
adopted by the National Congress of American Indians, a major
organization of Native American tribes.
The
trademark office has rejected a number of other trademarks on the basis
that they were disparaging. It objected to an applicant who wanted to
register "Khoran" as a trademark for wine. And it turned down an attempt
by Heeb magazine, a publication marketed to young urban Jews, to
register "Heeb."
Courts often recognize
trademark rights even in the absence of federal registration. If the
Redskins ultimately lose the battle, however, the team would lose
certain rights that attach to federal registrations, which could
potentially make it harder for them to crack down on bootleg merchants.
The
team could lose "tens of millions" on the royalties off merchandise,
said Frank Vuono, formerly the NFL's vice president of retail licensing,
if it ultimately lost its trademark. He also said the potential lost
sponsorship royalties leaguewide could be in the "hundreds of millions."
"If I'm a bank or I'm an auto company
and I want to promote using the Redskins, technically I could without
paying anything," said Mr. Vuono, now a founder of 16W Marketing.
According
to sponsorship consulting company IEG, the league's 32 teams pulled in a
total of $1.07 billion in sponsorship revenue in 2013.
Native Americans protest over the Washington Redskins'
nickname before the team's game against the Minnesota Vikings on Nov. 7,
2013 in Minneapolis.
Adam Bettcher/Getty Images
David Carter, executive director of
the University of Southern California's Sports Business Institute, said
that among NFL revenue generators, merchandise sales ranks behind
television revenue, sponsorships and ticket sales, and that money is
split evenly between teams, meaning a potential revenue drop caused by
bootleg merchandise would likely be small.
A
new logo or trademark could in fact be a boon for the team. "There's an
upside, depending on how they handle the process," Mr. Carter said,
noting the Los Angeles Clippers have already rebounded from a scandal
that ousted their owner, Donald Sterling, over racist comments earlier
this spring.
Other professional sports teams have managed to quietly play down some of the more notable Native American references.
Baseball's
Cleveland Indians, who said on Wednesday they currently face no legal
complaints over their name, have still reduced the role of their "Chief
Wahoo" logo in recent years, replacing the cartoon rendering on some
editions of their hats and jerseys with a "C" logo. Other teams, notably
football's Kansas City Chiefs and baseball's Atlanta Braves have
scrapped mascots, while retaining some Native American symbols.
The
issue is more complicated at the college level. Stanford, St. John's
and Eastern Michigan universities changed their Native American
nicknames long before 2005, when the NCAA began threatening schools with
sanctions if they kept "hostile and abusive" nicknames. A few, like the
Central Michigan Chippewas and Florida State Seminoles were able to
keep the names, after getting approval from local tribes.
The
effort to cancel the Redskins trademarks began in 1992—months after the
team won their last Super Bowl—when a group of Native Americans led by
activist
Suzan Harjo
filed a petition with the trademark office.
The
idea came from a young lawyer at Dorsey & Whitney LLP in
Minneapolis named
Stephen Baird,
who approached the firm with the idea around the time of the
championship game, which was held in Minneapolis and featured a matchup
between the Redskins and the Buffalo Bills, according to lawyers
familiar with the case.
In 1999, the
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruled that the name was disparaging and
should be changed. But a U.S. district judge in 2003 found that the
trademark office hadn't explained why the Redskins trademark was
disparaging.
The D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals in 2009 also sided with the Redskins, but for a technical
reason. It found that the challengers should have brought their
complaint years earlier if they were offended by the name. The board on
Wednesday said that wasn't an issue for the new group of challengers,
who brought the complaint soon after they reached the legal age of 18.
The plaintiffs argued that a new generation of Native Americans could
renew the case.
The current petitioners are five Native Americans from different tribes who said they were offended by the team's name.
In
his dissent, Judge Marc Bergsman said the petitioners still failed to
prove that the term "redskins" was disparaging at the time the
trademarks were registered.
But
Jesse Witten,
a lawyer for a group of Native Americans who challenged the
trademark, said on Wednesday that the "agency made a mistake in the past
when it granted registration." He added: "These trademarks are now more
difficult to protect."
Write to Jacob Gershman at jacob.gershman@wsj.com, Ashby Jones at ashby.jones@wsj.com and Kevin Clark at kevin.clark@wsj.com
The Trial of Lenny Bruce - UMKC School of Law
law.umkc.edu/.../bruc...
An account of the 1964 Cafe Au Go Go trial of comedian Lenny Bruce in New ... successfully nine free speech cases before the United States Supreme Court.
University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law
Lenny Bruce - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenny_Bruce
Lenny Bruce was born Leonard Alfred Schneider in Mineola, New York, grew up in .... These performances often included rants about his court battles over ...
Wikipedia
MEDIA FACT SHEET Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ...
www.uspto.gov/.../USPTO_Of...
2 days ago - Pro Football, Inc. decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ... law, the federal registrations for the “Redskins” trademarks involved in ...
United States Patent and Trademark Office
No comments:
Post a Comment