DiggityDaggityDo
DiggityDaggityDo
BMR Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2021
- Messages
- 40,191
But the Oakland athletics are OK? This doesn’t make any sense.the names were deemed too geographically descriptive and generic, lacking distinctiveness for a team not yet operating in Las Vegas.
Apparently the patent office said this as reason for denying it... WTH?weird that it is a problem now. i love how they say you can't look back at previous rulings of "athletics" and use it to explain why they are wrong in their current decision.
the names were deemed too geographically descriptive and generic, lacking distinctiveness for a team not yet operating in Las Vegas.
But the Oakland athletics are OK? This doesn’t make any sense.
Apparently the patent office said this as reason for denying it... WTH?
"the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office citing it as geographically descriptive,"
I frankly don't get it. Almost every damn pro team has a city in the name.
The A's havent' given up on the name yet. They are working the system.
The other issue is that the word they're focusing on here, Athletics, is a common word that is used in other contexts. Las Vegas Athletics could be an intramural basketball league for adults. That seems to be the problem the franchise is running into here
They also note that the A's could look to excerpts from the websites of "Snoga Athletics, Crowned Athletics, BSN Sports, Grind Athletics, and MLB Shop that shows that the wording ATHLETICS is used to refer to the type of clothing worn while performing sports activities."
I think we have a winner here!Sin City Athletics....nuff said. Patent the fucker.