A Ruling That Changes Little – Clarifying the Redskins Trademark Decision

by | Jun 20, 2014 | COMMUNITY

Amid the dramatic clamor over this week’s decision by the U.S. Patent Office to revoke the federal trademarks to the Washington Redskins‘ name, it is still unclear how things could really change.


Amid the dramatic clamor over this week’s decision by the U.S. Patent Office to revoke the federal trademarks to the Washington Redskins‘ name, it is still unclear how things could really change.

Well, the answer is, according to one expert, very little.

In a copy of the 2-1 decision obtained by the Washington Post, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board wrote, “We decide, based on the evidence properly before us, that these registrations must be cancelled because they are disparaging to Native Americans at the respective times they were registered.”

“It’s not as exciting of a holding as the press is making it out to be,” said Pam Gavin, an intellectual property lawyer with Gavin Law Offices based here in Richmond. According to Gavin, cancelled registration does not mean the team loses the right to use or own the Redskins name.

“Ownership of a mark in the United States is due to use,” she said. “Whoever uses a particular mark first in connection with particular goods or services within a particular geography owns the rights to that mark.”

“A mark basically has a three-dimensional aspect to it,” noted Gavin. For example, she said, a federal trademark registration can be compared to a car title, in that it is only one way to prove one’s ownership of a vehicle in court, versus a bill of sale or canceled check.

Because the Washington Redskins have had widespread and undisputed use of their name for decades, Gavin said that it would still be highly unlikely for a court to rule against them in an intellectual property dispute. “You’d have to be a judge that has lived under a rock forever not to know of the Washington Redskins,” Gavin said. “It’s a famous mark, basically.”

The Board acknowledged the ruling’s relative impotence in its 99-page decision, writing “We lack statutory authority to issue rulings concerning the right to use trademarks.” Furthermore, the registrations will remain in effect during the coming appeal process.

Opposition to the Washington Redskins’ name has simmered for decades, but public outcry came to a head last year.

Along with statements by celebrities, the mayor of Washington and even Redskins players pushing for the team to change its name, 49 U.S. Senators signed an open letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell asking the league to “formally support and push for a name change for the Washington football team.”

Forever on the front lines of the fight, the National Congress of American Indians against the Redskins Name aired the video below during this year’s NBA Finals in the hopes of further spreading awareness of their concerns.

The lawsuit which led to this decision was filed by five Native American plaintiffs in 2006, led by Arizona social worker Amanda Blackhorse, a member of the Navajo tribe. “Some people say it’s just political correctness run amok,” she told AZCentral. “But why don’t we deserve political correctness when other groups do?”

Team owner Daniel Snyder has flatly asserted he has no plans to replace his team’s name. “We’ll never change the name,” Snyder told USA Today in May 2013, “It’s that simple. NEVER – you can use caps.”

This is the second time the U.S. Patent Office has revoked the Redskins’ trademarks. In 1999, a nearly identical ruling was handed down against the Redskins name, but it was overturned four years later by a federal judge.

Bob Raskopf, a trademark attorney for the Redskins, recalled the team’s previous legal victory in a statement released Wednesday. “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 outcome here.”

So don’t expect to see a mess of fake Redskins merch at the local training camp this summer – but there might be a few protests.

Read RVA Mag correspondent Ian Graham’s December 2013 open letter to Daniel Snyder in support of a Redskins name change, in which he predicts a lot of these exact issues coming to a head, here: rvamag.com/articles/full/22785/an-open-letter-to-daniel-snyder-owner-of-the-washington-nfl-team

Headline image via youtube

Brad Kutner

Brad Kutner

Brad Kutner is the former editor of GayRVA and RVAMag from 2013 - 2017. He’s now the Richmond Bureau Chief for Radio IQ, a state-wide NPR outlet based in Roanoke. You can reach him at BradKutnerNPR@gmail.com




more in community

Richmond Loves Dolly Parton

I was gonna kill my husband in a cab in Peru, but “Islands in the Stream” came on the radio, and we stopped arguing and started singing. She could do that to you. You could totally be feeling some type of way, but if you put some Dolly Parton on, well, then you got a...

Read the Virginia Pride 2026 Pride Guide 🏳️‍🌈

For more than a decade, RVA Magazine has worked with Virginia Pride to produce the Official VA PrideFest Guide, bringing together stories from Richmond’s LGBTQ+ community and everything you need to know for PrideFest this Saturday, September 12,...

A Quick Guide For This Labor Day Weekend in Richmond

Labor Day weekend is here, and if your plan was to sit around doing absolutely nothing for four days, Richmond has other ideas. Here are ten things worth getting out of the house for this Labor Day weekend. Commonwealth Sound ExchangeThursday, Sept. 3 through...

For These Artists, PrideFest Is More Than Performance 🏳️‍🌈

Editor’s Note: RVA Magazine is proud to partner with Virginia PrideFest, happening Saturday, September 12, and to produce the annual Pride Guide celebrating Richmond and Virginia’s LGBTQ+ community.  We’d also like to thank the following sponsors who made the 2026...