Thursday Night Law

  • Aired:  06/19/14
  •  | Views: 126,969

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office determines that the Redskins' name is a racial slur and revokes the team's exclusive rights to the trademark. (4:18)

>> Jon: WELCOME TO "THE DAILYSHOW."

MY NAME IS JON STEWART.

WE HAVE A SHOW FOR YOUTONIGHT.

MY GUEST TONIGHT, THE FORMERIRAQ AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED

NATIONS, HAMID AL-BAYATI, WILLBE ON THE SHOW TONIGHT, AUTHOR

OF THE BOOK "FROM DICTATORSHIPTO DEMOCRACY," WHICH I IMAGINE

FOR THE PAPERBACK THERE WILLPROBABLY OBVIOUSLY BE AN

ADDENDUM, DEPENDING ONWHERE IT GOES NEXT.

BUT FIRST, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES ALEGAL RULING COMES DOWN THAT

MAKES EVERYONE SAY, WHAT?

WE'RE JUST GETTING AROUND TOTHAT NOW?

LIKE WHEN MISSISSIPPI FINALLYRATIFIED THE 13th AMENDMENT

BANNING SLAVERY.

[LAUGHTER]UM, LAST YEAR.

LAUGHTER OR WHEN THE SUPREMECOURT RULED RECENTLY YOU CAN NO

LONGER USE KITTENS FOR SKEETSHOOTING.

[LAUGHTER][AUDIENCE REACTS]

BEFORE YOU, OH, THAT CAT DOESLOOK LIKE IT'S ATTACKING.

IT MAY JUST BE THE VISUAL.

THAT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE HAPPYKITTY.

BUT THESE LEGAL DECISIONS ARETHE SUBJECT OF OUR NEW SEGMENT

"JON STEWART."

[CHEERING AND APPLAUSE]I HAD SAID WE SHOULDN'T DO THAT

ONE SO IF WE CAN JUST... IDON'T THINK THAT THAT... I DON'T

THINK THAT THAT... I DON'T THINKTHAT THAT'S BETTER...

[LAUGHTER][CHEERING AND APPLAUSE]

THAT'S NOT EVEN A LEGAL PUN.

THAT'S JUST... THERE YOU GO!

"THURSDAY NIGHT LAW."

ANYWAY, OUR FIRST STORY INVOLVESA SPORTS FRANCHISE WHOSE NAME IS

A BIT OF A QUAINT REFERENCE TOTHE PERCEIVED COLOR OF THE SKIN

OF THE PEOPLE WHO SPENT A COUPLEOF THOUSAND YEARS PREPARING THIS

COUNTRY FOR US TO DISCOVER.

>> TODAY THE U.S. PATENT OFFICEREVOKED THE TEAM'S TRADEMARK,

CALLING THE NAME A RACIAL SLURIN BLATANT VIOLATION IN

PROHIBITION AGAINST DISPARAGINGTRADEMARKS.

>> Jon: WHOA, THEY SAID THEYNO LONGER HAVE THE NAME BECAUSE

IT'S A RACIAL SLUR. YOU KNOW,THAT'S THE SAME REASON WHY

NOTRE DAME HAD TO CHANGE THEIRMONIKER TO "THE FIGHTING IRISH"

FROM "THE DRUNK GOOD FORNOTHING FIGHTING IRISH."

PLEASE, PLEASE SEND YOURANGRY LETTERS TO BRIAN WILLIAMS

CARE OF NBC NEWS. SO THEREDSKINS NO LONGER OWN THE

EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS TO THEIR OWNNAME, MEANING ANYONE IS FREE

TO FLOOD THE MARKET WITHREDSKINS BRANDED PRODUCTS OF ANY

KIND FROM BUTT CREAMS TO, IDON'T KNOW, REDSKINS OWNER

SIZED CONDOMS. THAT'SAN ACTUAL PENNY.

ALL I'M SAYING IS THE REDSKINS'OWNER HAS A TINY [BLEEPED].

WHAT?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THECONTROVERSY IS.

PERHAPS NOW REDSKINS' OWNERDANIEL SNYDER WILL FINALLY

CONCEDE THAT THIS NAME IS NOLONGER TENABLE.

>> TODAY THE TEAM SAID IT WOULDAPPEAL.

THE OWNER OF THE TEAM, DANIELSNYDER, HAS REFUSED TO CHANGE

THE NAME CITING TRADITION.

>> Jon: OH, TRADITION.

SO YOUR ARGUMENT IN KEEPING YOURNAME IS YOU CAN'T JUST COME IN

HERE AND TAKE OVER OUR ANCESTRALPROPERTY IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

YOU'RE SAYING... I GUESS WHATYOU'RE SAYING IS WE HAD IT

FIRST.

IT WOULD BE LIKE THIS, IT WOULDBE LIKE THIS I GUESS, IF A GROUP

OF PEOPLE TAUGHT YOU HOW THESURVIVE A HARSH WINTER AND THEN

YOU INVITED THAT GROUP OF PEOPLETO A FEAST TO SHOW YOUR

GRATITUDE TO THEM FOR HELPINGYOU TO SURVIVE AND THEN AFTER

DESSERT LET'S SAY YOU KILLEDTHEM AND TOOK THEIR LAND AND

THEN YEARS LATER TO COMMEMORATETHAT DAY, YOU HELD AN

ANNUAL FEAST THAT INCLUDED ASPORTING EVENT IN WHICH ONE

OF THE PARTICIPATING TEAM'SNAMES WAS A DEROGATORY TERM FOR

THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE THATYOU HAD KILLED.

I'M TALKING ABOUT THE REDSKINS!

THE REDSKINS, NOT THE PACKERS.

SWITCH IT.

GET A NEW NAME ALREADY.

IT'S THE 21st CENTURY.

Loading...