The Washington Commanders's old name and logo design continue to cause controversy six years after they were dropped, and for what seems like a silly reason. And that's led some legal experts to call for a change in trademark law.
The American football team finally retired the 'Redskins' logo and name in 2020 due to its racist connotations. So why did it drop a fresh collection of merchandise with the old branding just ahead of the new NFL season? According to the team, it effectively has a legal obligation to continue to promote racist stereotypes.
NEW: Commanders selling merch with the retired Redskins name and logo — and team says the reason is trademark law.“We are required to maintain the marks in commercial usage so that marks remain under franchise control.” But position on returning to old name hasn’t changed. pic.twitter.com/c6ZyGENrbVAugust 25, 2026
The Washington Commanders' retro redskins merchandise sold out in just 48 hours, which is perhaps a sign of how much some fans are still attached to the old brand. The Association on American Indian Affairs criticised the drop and raised concerns that the limited-edition release could have been a trial to test public reaction ahead of a possible backslide towards using a racial slur in its branding.
The club claims that's not the case. It also claims the use of the controversial logo wasn't for nostalgia's sake. It argues that it has to continue to occasionally sell products with the questionable branding so that others can't. Otherwise, it could be argued that the team has abandoned its trademarks, like a social media company recently tried to claim regarding the Twitter name.
Some aren't convinced by the team's argument. The controversial merchandise drop was hardly discreet: it included an Art Monk T-shirt with a huge image of the Redskins logo. Trademark law doesn't say anything about having to efforts to maximise merchandise sales to avoid claims of abandonment.
Outside of sport, some brands have found much more discreet solutions. Quaker Oats continues to use a small placement of its Aunt Jemima logo on Pearl Milling Co packaging to avoid leaving it up for grabs.
Either way, the legal scholars Chris Buccafusco and Jon J. Lee suggest that the incident shows there's an argument for the law to be changed. Writing for MS Now, they say legislation could be changed to prevent claims of abandonment in cases where the public still associates a former trademark with the original owner, or that Congress could create a registry for retired trademarks that have historical significance connected to commercial success or major political or social issues.
"With such a law, the United States Patent and Trademark Office would be empowered to stop others from selling merchandise bearing the trademarks, ensuring that the trademarks would be removed from the marketplace for good," they argue. "It also allows companies that want to sever ties with their racist pasts to do so with less concern that others will be able to swoop in to take their place."
Then we can go back to debating the merits of the Washington Commanders' folded 'W' alternate logo.
