Should the Edmonton Eskimos have to change their name?

[crazy canuck]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional.

Which is essentially the point of Article 15 of the UN declaration 

Added to the declaration about indigenous people's controlling their own IP - which includes their names...

But it's not "their name" - it's a name that others gave to them.

By that logic there is nothing wrong with the name Redskin. Are you really going to try to argue that point?

Ownership of the IP of the name is not the only criteria that we should examine this by.

I agree.

[Eddie Teach]

I think that is what the Inuit will do next.  But for now they have made a request to the team to change the name.

Well, should they change it and should they have to change it are different questions.

[crazy canuck]

I think that is what the Inuit will do next.  But for now they have made a request to the team to change the name.

Well, should they change it and should they have to change it are different questions.

I am not sure what point you are making.  If the name is offensive (and the Inuit say it is) they should change it.  I am not sure what you mean by " should they have to change it"

[Malthus]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional.

Which is essentially the point of Article 15 of the UN declaration 

Added to the declaration about indigenous people's controlling their own IP - which includes their names...

The whole point of their complaint is that "Eskimo" isn't their name. It is hard to argue that they own the IP rights to it.

It is more in the nature of an inadvertent slur, and ought to be avoided for this reason.

[derspiess]

IP?  That's a bit of a stretch.

[Eddie Teach]

I am not sure what point you are making.  If the name is offensive (and the Inuit say it is) they should change it.  I am not sure what you mean by " should they have to change it"

I mean the government should not step in.

[Razgovory]

"Eskimo" is the proper term used by the US Census Bureau, Inuit is not proper term since it does not describe the people's in Alaska.  It has nothing to to with idea of "eater's of raw meat".  It is simply an exonyme.

[Barrister]

"Eskimo" is the proper term used by the US Census Bureau, Inuit is not proper term since it does not describe the people's in Alaska.  It has nothing to to with idea of "eater's of raw meat".  It is simply an exonyme.

I think Alaskan Eskimos are not bothered by the name of a CFL team.

Canadian Inuit, on the other hand...

[crazy canuck]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional.

Which is essentially the point of Article 15 of the UN declaration 

Added to the declaration about indigenous people's controlling their own IP - which includes their names...

The whole point of their complaint is that "Eskimo" isn't their name. It is hard to argue that they own the IP rights to it.

It is more in the nature of an inadvertent slur, and ought to be avoided for this reason.

Article 15 doesn't deal with IP 

[Razgovory]

If the name describe a people they aren't, what grounds to they have to complain?

[crazy canuck]

If the name describe a people they aren't, what grounds to they have to complain?

For the same reason indigenous people complain about the name Redskin. 

[crazy canuck]

I am not sure what point you are making.  If the name is offensive (and the Inuit say it is) they should change it.  I am not sure what you mean by " should they have to change it"

I mean the government should not step in.

Its not 

[Razgovory]

If the name describe a people they aren't, what grounds to they have to complain?

For the same reason indigenous people complain about the name Redskin.

Not the same though.  This refers to one group of indigenous people.  A team took on the name "the Seminoles", would the Sioux have any grounds to complain? 

[Malthus]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional.

Which is essentially the point of Article 15 of the UN declaration 

Added to the declaration about indigenous people's controlling their own IP - which includes their names...

The whole point of their complaint is that "Eskimo" isn't their name. It is hard to argue that they own the IP rights to it.

It is more in the nature of an inadvertent slur, and ought to be avoided for this reason.

Article 15 doesn't deal with IP 

Article 15 contains one right, and one state requirement.

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity
of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be
appropriately reflected in education and public information.

2. States shall take effective measures, in consultation and cooperation
with the indigenous peoples concerned, to combat prejudice
and eliminate discrimination and to promote tolerance, understanding
and good relations among indigenous peoples and all other segments
of society.

Neither of these appear particularly applicable here.  The "right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, histories and aspirations" is not impacted by the name chosen for a football team, and the second point is a state requirement. Or is the argument that the state should step in and ban the use of the name as an "effective measure"?

To my mind, this isn't a matter for such undertakings, but of politeness and managing of the team's own PR.

[The Brain]

PC gone mad. So I guess yeah they should change their name.