Designed to appeal and speak to the customers of a specific time and place, trademarks can become hallmarks of a bygone era.
The controversy surrounding the use of the REDSKINS trademark and logo shows just how much the public reaction to symbols can alter and shift over time. In a decision now on appeal, the United States Trademark Trial and Appeal Board cancelled the REDSKINS trademark registrations, ruling that they were considered disparaging and offensive to approximately one out of three native Americans when they were registered.
Stepping back from this present day dispute, pioneer and native American symbology once captured the popular imagination in the early 20th century. Businesses sought to capitalize on romantic visions of western expansion by adopting symbols recalling the Old West. Once those nostalgic reference points lost commercial traction with consumers, these companies changed shopworn symbols of brand identity or perhaps the companies and products faded away altogether from the marketplace.
How many of us can now connect the following former trademark symbols referencing the Old West with their original producer and the products they were meant to brand? This brief reprise underscores how dynamic trademark symbols are in adjusting to the tastes and sensibilities of each new generation of American consumers. Answers follow at the end.
These trademarks were designed for the following producers and products: (1) Albers Bros. Milling Co., Portland Oregon, Corn Flakes; (2) Sandhill Fruit Growers Association, North Carolina; Fruit—Namely Peaches and and Apples; (3) The Keefe Packing Co., Arkansas City, Kansas; Barbecue Ham; (4) Hoyland Flour Mills Co., Kansas City, Missouri; Wheat Flour; and (5) Minneapolis Milling Co., Minneapolis, Minnesota; Wheat.
 These trademarks are all featured in Trademarks of the 20's and 30's by Eric Baker and Tyler Blik (Chronicle Books 1985).
Before proceeding, please note: If you are not a current client of Lane Powell PC, please do not include any information in this email that you or someone else considers to be confidential or secret in nature. Prior to the establishment of a lawyer-client relationship, unsolicited emails from non-clients containing confidential or secret information cannot be protected from disclosure.