Which means people can’t go after the Redskins. Snowflakes will be heading for their safe zones.

Quote:The Supreme Court struck down a federal law banning the registration of disparaging trademarks Monday, finding the law violates the First Amendment’s free speech clause.

The ruling, written by Justice Samuel Alito, says that trademarks are private, not government speech, and that the government may not curtail even offensive expression.

“Holding that the registration of a trademark converts the mark into government speech would constitute a huge and dangerous extension of the government-speech doctrine, for other systems of government registration (such as copyright) could easily be characterized in the same way,” Alito wrote.

The 1946 Lanham Trademark Act prohibits the registration of a trademark that “may disparage” a person, community, or institution. A challenge to the law was brought by Simon Shiao Tam, bass-player for the Chinatown dance rock band “The Slants.” The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) denied the band’s request for a trademark, finding their name could offend Asians. The band is composed exclusively of Asian-Americans, who selected the name to strip the slur of its potency.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/19/suprem...rademarks/

This is a good ruling.

This is a win for free expression.

Huge win. 8-0.

There were 4 different opinions, but it was unanimous. Gorsuch didn't hear the case and so didn't vote.

My hate for the redskins requires me to be unhappy about this. Go cowboys!

I'm just gunna start trademarking random racist businesses in hopes someone has to buy it from me.

Come on down to honky tax professionals, right between wetback lawn services and nignog daycare in the **** outlet mall.

Does that mean that North Dakota could go back to the Fighting Sioux nickname?

(06-19-2017 03:26 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Does that mean that North Dakota could go back to the Fighting Sioux nickname?

I sure as hell hope so.

(06-19-2017 03:26 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Does that mean that North Dakota could go back to the Fighting Sioux nickname?

The NCAA was pissed about that not the government.

(06-19-2017 12:51 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  My hate for the redskins requires me to be unhappy about this. Go cowboys!

I'm just gunna start trademarking random racist businesses in hopes someone has to buy it from me.

Come on down to honky tax professionals, right between wetback lawn services and nignog daycare in the **** outlet mall.

and whats racist about those names?

(06-19-2017 03:34 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:26 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Does that mean that North Dakota could go back to the Fighting Sioux nickname?

The NCAA was pissed about that not the government.

Yeah, but the school got permission from a Sioux Tribe to use it. But, they can't keep it, but Florida State can?

(06-19-2017 03:59 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:34 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:26 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Does that mean that North Dakota could go back to the Fighting Sioux nickname?

The NCAA was pissed about that not the government.

Yeah, but the school got permission from a Sioux Tribe to use it. But, they can't keep it, but Florida State can?

I am not totally familiar with that but I think North Dakota failed to get the approval of some random group of Sioux whereas the Seminole nation was unanimous or pretty close.

Nice to see some unanimous decisions. This court may end up being special for the right reasons.

(06-19-2017 03:31 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:26 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Does that mean that North Dakota could go back to the Fighting Sioux nickname?

I sure as hell hope so.

No, the NCAA can still tell them no...

(06-19-2017 04:02 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:59 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:34 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:26 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Does that mean that North Dakota could go back to the Fighting Sioux nickname?

The NCAA was pissed about that not the government.

Yeah, but the school got permission from a Sioux Tribe to use it. But, they can't keep it, but Florida State can?

I am not totally familiar with that but I think North Dakota failed to get the approval of some random group of Sioux whereas the Seminole nation was unanimous or pretty close.

In North Dakota's case, the way I understood it was they needed multiple tribes to sign off on the Fighting Sioux nickname. If memory serves, it was 2 tribes and only 1 signed off on it. Thus the NCAA told UND their Fighting Sioux nickname was a no go. As for if they got permission from the 2nd tribe would the NCAA relent and let them be the Fighting Sioux again? I doubt it.

(06-19-2017 07:06 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 04:02 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:59 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:34 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-19-2017 03:26 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Does that mean that North Dakota could go back to the Fighting Sioux nickname?

The NCAA was pissed about that not the government.

Yeah, but the school got permission from a Sioux Tribe to use it. But, they can't keep it, but Florida State can?

I am not totally familiar with that but I think North Dakota failed to get the approval of some random group of Sioux whereas the Seminole nation was unanimous or pretty close.

In North Dakota's case, the way I understood it was they needed multiple tribes to sign off on the Fighting Sioux nickname. If memory serves, it was 2 tribes and only 1 signed off on it. Thus the NCAA told UND their Fighting Sioux nickname was a no go. As for if they got permission from the 2nd tribe would the NCAA relent and let them be the Fighting Sioux again? I doubt it.

They should have sued the NCAA for racial discrimination. Irish are good enough to be mascots but Indians are not? That is racist. You can win that case.