|
Which was more embarrassing? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| The Debate |
|
32 | 14.81% |
| MNF |
|
8 | 3.70% |
| Donald's Hair |
|
12 | 5.56% |
| Six Pickspatrick |
|
48 | 22.22% |
| The Texans |
|
50 | 23.15% |
| Whatever's about to happen to the Bills. |
|
37 | 17.13% |
| Print the Shirts |
|
29 | 13.43% |
| Total: | 216 votes | ||
|
Spoeank posted:49ers confirm an Achilles tear for Bowman. 
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
Redskins trademark update tl;dr: nothing happened of any importance. The 8-justice Supreme Court is currently considering a case involving unnotable Portland all-Asian indie-electronic band The Slants. Federal trademark law allows trademarks to be rejected if they're offensive, or at least it did until The Slants convinced the Federal Circuit that that part of the law is unconstitutional (IIRC, by a general rule that excessively vague laws lead to unconstitutionally inconsistent application). The federal trademark office is appealing; that case will be heard sometime this term. The Redskins are currently appealing a district court judgment against them to the 4th Circuit. The Federal Circuit case doesn't directly affect that because circuits are weird and have their own system of precedent. That case has not been heard by the 4th yet, but Redskins asked the Court to consider the cases together anyway. Today, the Court declined. This doesn't change anything about the Redskins case; it will still eventually be heard by the 4th and then probably appealed from there. By the time of that appeal, at least, we'll probably have gotten the Supreme Court ruling from the Slants case, which will probably have some significant bearing on the Redskins case unless somehow it's 4-4. But it's all going to be in appeal for the next eternity.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 01:32
|
|