Coke is also the overheated coal used to make steel. My dad worked at a steel mill while going to college...

I saw that nickname earlier, and I think it was you who proposed it. I do like the nickname. Their team certainly would be capable of screwing the other team over with that moniker. However, the Foreskins would not be accepted very well by the women in DC.

While any decision to rename the team is up to the owners, given the political assault against the Redskins, perhaps the best thing Dan Snyder can do is to give them what they want, accompanied by the following announcement:

"In response to the inexplicable uproar concerning our team name by politicians in this town who want to distract our citizens from their numerous failures, I have decided to rename our team to something that more appropriately matches the nature of our city of Washington. I hereby rename the team to be the Washington Foreskins."

Reading the US code on referenced
"No trademark by which the goods of the applicant may be distinguished from the goods of others shall be refused registration on the principal register on account of its nature unless it—
(a) Consists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter; or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute; or a geographical indication which, when used on or in connection with wines or spirits, identifies a place other than the origin of the goods and is first used on or in connection with wines or spirits by the applicant on or after one year after the date on which the WTO Agreement (as defined in section 3501 (9) of title 19) enters into force with respect to the United States. "

The key thing in the law is the phrase "shall be refused registration". Once trademarked isn't it too late to 'refuse' the trademark? This is confiscation/revocation, not refusal. If they are allowed to ex post facto refuse something based upon the ever changing politically correct doctrine of the time, then what was safe decades ago is unsafe now. This standard for refusal is nebulous at best.

sorry the US Code cited is section 2(a) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/1...

I'm not a fan of the Redskins, and increasingly not one of the NFL, but this ruling is just wrong. Appealable as this ruling is, it is another step beyond crony capitalism, on our way to full-blown fascism.

I never realized until now the reason the american indians were defeated by the paleface. It wasn't the color of their skin. It was the thickness.

That's funny...

Actually, no. This decision has no real teeth. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/experts-a...

what's going to happen now is theft. anyone will be able to print up merchandise with the official logo, funneling revenues away from the team into the hands of legal looters

UNBELIEVABLE. The audacity of this government.