Just because I know it is coming and because I don’t want to try and explain it all here is part of an article from Smithsonian explaining it.
“The Patent Office made a similar ruling in 1999, but it was overturned on appeal. An article from last fall in Forbes has a great explanation of why exactly the ruling was overturned:
Laches is an equitable legal defense, under which claims can be barred if a person waits too long to bring them. In the Harjo litigation, the district court found that the plaintiffs’ claims were barred using laches, because the Redskins were awarded their first trademark in 1967. The Harjo plaintiffs, however, didn’t bring their case until 1992–some 25 years after the Redskins’ first trademark was approved.
The time clock for the doctrine of laches begins ticking when a plaintiff reaches the age of majority. In the Harjo case, the youngest plaintiff was only one-year-old in 1967, when the Redskins obtained their first trademark. However, on remand, the district court found that even this plaintiff’s case violated the doctrine of laches, since he waited eight years after reaching the age of majority to bring his case.
The age of majority varies by state, but is usually between 18 and 21. In the current case, the suit was filed when the plaintiffs were between 18 and 24, so they should be able to avoid the same laches pitfall of the case that came before.”
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/redskins-trademark-registration-cancelled-us-patent-office-180951776/#gjUZByspibcgsHcQ.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
