‘The Court concludes that the [Board’s] finding that the marks at issue ‘may disparage’ Native Americans is unsupported by substantial evidence, is logically flawed, and fails to apply the correct legal standard to its own findings of fact.’ Those aren’t my words. That was the court’s conclusion. We are confident that when a district court reviews today’s split decision, it will reach a similar conclusion.
—Bob Raskopf of Quinn Emanuel, trademark counsel for the Washington pro football club, discussing yesterday’s ruling invalidating the club’s federal intellectual property rights in the name ‘Redskins.’ Yes, maybe there’s a judge who still thinks Native Americans only “may” find the term offensive, even though it’s labeled “offensive” in the DICTIONARY. Raskopf is betting that a judge will hear argument on the USPTO’s detailed, 177-page opinion and find it as lacking in evidence as Judge Kollar-Kotelly did in 2003 (except the D.C. Circuit specifically limited that decision to the issue of laches).
It’s a more interesting bet than whether they’ll win the division.