is worried now that the government has revoked the Indian Head Trademark of the Redskins. Using their logic it wouldn't be a stretch to pull the Savage one as well. They might want to call a Marketing firm and get working on a new logo.
Printable View
is worried now that the government has revoked the Indian Head Trademark of the Redskins. Using their logic it wouldn't be a stretch to pull the Savage one as well. They might want to call a Marketing firm and get working on a new logo.
Probably not. As I recall the logo was a gift as part of an agreement with a Native American group in New York ages ago. I'm sure that agreement is relatively small potatoes in the four centuries of agreements between Whites and Natives on this continent. Also, the name is the company founder's, not a slur against any group of people. Had the football team been named after George Redskin, inventor of the redskin potato and philanthropist whose charity supported a local tribe, things might have been different.
Yeah but old Savage probably got the whole tribe drunk on cheap booze before they agreed to that.
It's only a matter of time till some pinhead from Princton finds out the real story on that.
Paid for with a government grant of coarse. The Atlanta Braves are in the cross hairs also.
Maybe if they agree to donate the money from those foam hatchet sales to the right people they can survive for awhile.
Great point Rosco! I am surprised they have not been targeted yet. I think I am going to file a federal lawsuit against "cracker" barrel. I am just offended.
They are already in the crosshairs as is Chick a Fila. After all who are they to be preaching morality?Quote:
Originally Posted by snowgetter1
Although DrThunder makes a valid point, I don't think many of the shallow talking heads in the media would see it that way. More often than not, it would probably go along the lines of "Hey that is an Indian head is on the side of a rifle, shotgun etc.. and therefore these must have been used to massacre Indian Tribes all over the country". Since this is case, Savage Arms is racist and must be held accountable. Or somehow equate the name Savage and the Indian and imply the company must have that all Indian were nothing more than Savages. Sad to say, but it seems the government is wielding it's power without Judicial consent to anything it finds objectionable.
Or you could all just be a bunch of idiots and give all the left-wing loons plenty of argument ideas yourselves here on this forum. :rolleyes:
As for how Savage got the logo, they got it in 1919 during an exchange for goods deal. Arthur Savage traded a lot of model 99′s to Native American Chief Lame Bear and his tribe, the Southern Cheyenne, and in return Savage was given permission to use the Chief’s image for the company’s logo.