
Should We Be Able to Reclaim a Racist Insult – As a Registered Trademark? - Colin_M
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/magazine/should-we-be-able-to-reclaim-a-racist-insult-as-a-registered-trademark.html?WT.mc_id=2016-KWP-AUD_DEV&WT.mc_ev=click&ad-keywords=AUDDEVREMARK&kwp_0=314525&kwp_4=1210945&kwp_1=546037&_r=0
======
xanados
I'm not sure what to call this but... problematic? It is not too much to ask
from your government but that they give everyone equal rights and privileges
under the law. I don't necessarily mean that as an absolute, but it should at
least be the default assumption. Cases where we want to provide preferential
treatment to certain groups should at least meet the bar of that desire being
explicitly spelled out in the relevant legislation.

One of the main benefits of good governance is that their decisions are
predictable and reliable. If we are to enshrine identity politics into routine
administrative matters, which is exactly what this columnist is obliquely
supporting, that leaves us with decisions which are even more capricious /
arbitrary / subjective than we currently have. You don't want to go to your
lawyer if you are a band and hear "Well, maybe we could get that name, but I
am not sure you guys have enough Asian bona fides. Maybe you could replace the
singer with someone from China rather than a half-Filipino?"

The best case scenario is that it will merely have a chilling effect, where
any name even moderately edgy is avoided by people who don't think they will
be able to match with present moment social justice criteria. But there is
something very morally wrong with the government saying "We reject your
[trademark / patent / immigration] application on the basis of your skin
color." And I like some edgy things and names, including NWA, so I wouldn't
want that to go away.

Is this entire thing merely my opinion and hopelessly normative? Yes. Could
you find extensive academic discussions of all the relevant factors produced
by X Studies departments that perfectly tease apart all the politically
correct aspects that should be considered in these decisions? Presumably you
could, or you would be able to if this became a hot-button issue. But weighed
against simplicity of government, the ability to actually know the rules and
follow them, I don't think that social justice wins. Let that debate take
place in the market of ideas rather than in the halls of justice.

~~~
tokenizer
> But weighed against simplicity of government, the ability to actually know
> the rules and follow them, I don't think that social justice wins. Let that
> debate take place in the market of ideas rather than in the halls of
> justice.

Ideally any word should be able to be copyrighted or whatever.

But if you want to ban words based on something, like racism or whatever.
Don't be surprised when someone's sensibilities outpace yours.

------
pitaj
Here's a very relevant interview of Simon Tam by ReasonTV:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_yNnmsrLkc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_yNnmsrLkc)

------
tommorris
Long podcast interview with Simon Tam that's well worth listening to if you
are interested in IP law - [http://openargs.com/oa33-interview-
slants/](http://openargs.com/oa33-interview-slants/)

