Hail to the Redskins....

[cwfunrider]

Opps. I have seen this at the shows and thought. Meh. Not for me but what ever.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/04/ ... hemed-gun/

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[OakRidgeStars]

The real crime here is that the seller wants $2,000 for it.

[MarcSpaz]

I remeber when you could decorate you belongs with whatever you wanted and didn't have to worry about being dragged into court for it. Ah, the good ole days.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[cwfunrider]

I remeber when you could decorate you belongs with whatever you wanted and didn't have to worry about being dragged into court for it. Ah, the good ole days.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Trying to sell it on the retail market is the issue the NFL is going to have for copyright issues. You have seen that disclaimer at the beginning of each broadcast saying the NFL logo and blah blah blah are exclusive rights and so on. You can decorate your private property all you want. Retail sale of said items crosses their line.

That said. It's stupid if they make a bigger deal about it. Ugly anyhow. And Oak is right. 2gs. Yeah right.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[MarcSpaz]

eh, $1,000 AR, $550 EOTech, $10 in over the counter spray paint and stickers from Wal-Mart, 20% mark-up cuz its at the gun show.... seems right on point to me.

That rifle (or one like it) has been there every show for as long as I can remember. I wonder why its an issue after all these years. Maybe Snyder doesn't like Sterling taking all the attention "he" could be getting.

[vaeevictiss]

This is pretty funny. Rape, murder, assault, drugs... All cool with the NFL...but nooooo... This horribly painted fan tribute...this...this is what will ruin our image.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[mamabearCali]

This is pretty funny. Rape, murder, assault, drugs... All cool with the NFL...but nooooo... This horribly painted fan tribute...this...this is what will ruin our image.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

yep....this

[KaosDad]

"The NFL has no stance on ownership or gun control," bullshit.

[dorminWS]

I remeber when you could decorate you belongs with whatever you wanted and didn't have to worry about being dragged into court for it. Ah, the good ole days.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Not really. Registered trademarks are protected and the owner can seek various legal remedies for ANY unauthorized use. If you don't want your registered trademark used by a certain party or in a certain way, then bigosh, it's YOUR trademark and you can prevent it unless you've done a sloppy job of licensing its use. Been that way since Hector was pup. It is really a necessary and reasonable protection of property rights that are sometimes worth millions or even billions of dollars. These days with instant world-wide dissemination of almost everything that happens almost everywhere, it's just a lot easier to find out about unauthorized use of protected marks. Of course, like any legal rights, these can also be abused by folks just being chickensh!t about enforcing them. As cwfunrider observed, this instance is of commercial use of a trademark, so while you can justifiably say the 'Skins and the whole NFL are stupid about gun rights, you can't really call them for being out of line about the use of the trademark. At the very least, the "skins and probably the NFL are entitled to be paid for the use of the trademark.

[MarcSpaz]

While all that may be true, When I was a kid, most companies didn't care if a high school kid drew a Nike logo on his notebook. Even if the kid was a stoner and they don't want to be associated with drugs, it is too expensive and a PITA to do with little to no positive gain.

What this guy did with that gun was put colored paint on a rifle that are very similar to the team colors (can't copyright colors) and put stickers from (name your favorite retail store) and now he is selling the gun and they are talking about copyright infringements.

That would be like me taking a Ruger sticker that came with my handgun, putting it on my black Prius, and Ruger bringing a civil case against me when I try to sell the Prius because they never authorized their logo to be used by the "Green Energy" movement.

If anything, the guy might win the case by showing he bought the stickers in a retail store, literally buying the rights to put the stickers on whatever he wants. Unless the package the stickers were in states that purchasing the stickers does not grant rights to use the stickers on firearms or on an object you may intend to sell, legally, he purchased the rights to do whatever he wants with "those" specific stickers.

Bottom line... someone in the franchise is being greedy or a chickenshit. In either case, I seriously doubt they have any legal standing.

[OakRidgeStars]

"The NFL has no stance on ownership or gun control," bullshit.

I wonder if the NFL takes a position on the number of it's players that are prohibited from possessing firearms?

[Chasbo00]

Here is an email sent to Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune after an article he published concerning a name change for the Washington Redskins

Dear Mr. Page...

I always love your articles. and I generally agree with them. I would suggest, as in an email I received, they change the name to the "Foreskins" to better represent their community, paying tribute to the dick heads in Congress.

Here are some other politically correctness to consider: I agree with our Native American population. I am highly insulted by the racially charged name of the Washington Redskins. One might argue that to name a professional football team after Native Americans would exalt them as fine warriors, but nay, nay. We must be careful not to offend, and in the spirit of political correctness and courtesy, we must move forward. Let's ditch the Kansas City Chiefs, the Atlanta Braves and the Cleveland Indians. If your shorts are in a wad because of the reference the name Redskins makes to skin color, then we need to get rid of the Cleveland Browns.

The Carolina Panthers obviously were named to keep the memory of militant Blacks from the 60's alive. Gone. It's offensive to us white folk.

The New York Yankees offend the Southern population. Do you see a team named for the Confederacy? No! There is no room for any reference to that tragic war that cost this country so many young men's lives.

I am also offended by the blatant references to the Catholic religion among our sports team names. Totally inappropriate to have the New Orleans Saints, the Los Angeles Angels or the San Diego Padres.

Then there are the team names that glorify criminals who raped and pillaged. We are talking about the horrible Oakland Raiders, the Minnesota Vikings, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Pittsburgh Pirates!

Now, let us address those teams that clearly send the wrong message to our children. The San Diego Chargers promote irresponsible fighting or even spending habits. Wrong message to our children.

The New York Giants and the San Francisco Giants promote obesity, a growing childhood epidemic. Wrong message to our children.

The Cincinnati Reds promote downers/barbiturates . Wrong message to our children.

The Milwaukee Brewers---well that goes without saying . . . Wrong message to our children.

So, there you go. We need to support any legislation that comes out to rectify this travesty, because the government will likely become involved with this issue, as they should. Just the kind of thing the do-nothing congress loves . . .

As a die hard Oregon State fan, my wife and I, with all of this in mind, it might also make some sense to change the name of the Oregon State women's athletic teams to something other than "the Beavers."

[dusterdude]

Love it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk