View Single Post
  #306  
Old 07-26-2021, 03:59 PM
BobC BobC is offline
Bob C.
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
I don't understand that premise. How do you feel about lawsuits? Should someone accept a monetary award for something they were wronged by?

Lawsuits for what? There is no lawsuit that anyone has officially filed against the Cleveland team to my knowledge. And even so, you usually have to show there are some monetary damages incurred to be able to get anything significant money-wise through the courts.

I was simply speculating earlier on how the use of the word "Indians" and the image of Chief Wahoo may have been perceived by the native American community had the Cleveland team been giving/donating money to them all along as a sort of residual/licensing type of payment for the use of that term and image. I was aware of the fact that even though the team stopped using the Chief Wahoo image after 2018, they still held the copyright to it and have continued to produce and sell items with the image on it. Except now, they are going to be donating some of the future proceeds from those sales to native American groups. I didn't bring that point up before, but since a link to a story telling about the future donations was posted by someone else, I figured I'd bring it into the discussion as something else to keep in mind and look at in the overall scope of things. I am merely putting the question out there that if a group feels wronged about a name or image that is associated with them, does the fact that someone offers them money to more or less pay for the use of that term or image change the situation somehow. Also raising the question of how does it possibly impact the feelings and actions of other members of the "wronged group" that aren't getting any of the money now being paid or, don't care about the money and still want the use of the name and image eliminated entirely. You potentially end up with different factions of the "wronged group" possibly arguing among themselves as to what is the correct thing to do. So now who's right or wrong? Which group do you listen to as to how to make things right if the "wronged group" can't even agree among themselves as to the proper way to handle or fix things?

There are very few universal truths we have in life as humans that are going to be 100% accurate, 100% of the time. The old adage is always about death and taxes, but there are still people currently, and in the past, that have been on this planet that ended up never paying taxes, so that just leaves death as a universal given. However, another universal truth for humans is that we will never all agree 100% on anything. There either is, has been, or will be, at least one human that will disagree with every other human to ever exist on literally every topic, idea or question that ever has or will come up. It is human nature, and the fact that we are all different is possibly the greatest and worst things about us, all at the same time.