Redskins cite list of ridiculously offensive trademarks in team’s court appeal

And you thought naming a team the Washington Redskins was offensive.

Wait until you get a load of the trademarks protected by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that the team’s lawyers are citing in their appeal of last year’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruling — and a federal judge’s subsequent upholding — that Redskins is too “disparaging” a term to trademark.

The Washington Post first reported the appeal, Deadspin has the vulgar details and the team’s filing can be read in full here, but let’s just list a few of the trademarks protected by the PTO and cited by lawyers:

— TAKE YO PANTIES OFF clothing

— DUMB BLONDE beer

— MIDGET-MAN condoms and inflatable sex dolls

— SHANK THE B!T@H board game

— CRACKA AZZ SKATEBOARDS

— WTF WORK? online forum

— GRINGO STYLE SALSA

— WHITE GIRL WITH A BOOTY apparel

— OH! MY NAPPY HAIR shampoos

— BOYS ARE STUPID, THROW ROCKS AT THEM wallets

Again, these are 10 of the less offensive terms Redskins lawyers cited in a ridiculously long list that was capped by a fantastic final sentence: “Word limits prevent us from listing more.”

The lawyers point in listing all of these? If there are thousands of offensive trademarks among millions, then why are the Redskins being singularly targeted? If the PTO wants to start regulating the perceived level of offensiveness of each trademark, that’s a slippery slope that one could easily see ending up as a violation of one’s First Amendment rights.

On the other hand, it’s equally absurd that the Redskins are arguing, not that their team’s nickname isn’t offensive, but rather that their trademark deserves the same respect as these other offensive trademarks.

This is the unintentional comedy that results when government agencies and lawyers share a room.

​

– – – – – – –

Ben Rohrbach is a contributor for Ball Don’t Lie and Shutdown Corner on Yahoo Sports. Have a tip? Email him at [email protected] or follow him on Twitter! Follow @brohrbach