Carol Moseley-Braun speaking against granting a design patent in the use of the Confederate flag
Carol Moseley-Braun speaking against granting a design patent in the use of the Confederate flag
Female African American Democratic Senator from Illinois Carol Moseley Braun African American women giving a speech against providing a patent to the United Daughters of the Confederacy for the use of the Confederate flag. Senate Floor, Washington D.C.
Carol Moseley-Braun speaking against granting a design patent in the use of the Confederate flag
MCU CAROL MOSELEY-BRAUN (Former Democratic Senator from Illinois) speaking from the Senate floor, "I think it is important, Mr President, to note what a design patent is. It is not just a matter of simple recognition. It is a rare honor given to an organization. There are very few of them given. In fact, design patents have only been conferred on fewer than 10 organizations in this century. They are given for a period of some 14 years. And it just is rarely done, in any event, to any organization. There are a number of fine organizations throughout this country, who are well known, that do not enjoy or do not have design patents. But this organization, by a matter of oversight or whatever, has this last year, was brought to the attention of the Judiciary Committee, and the design patent was refused, was withheld. Now the Senator from South Carolina has come to the floor attempting to undo the work of the Judiciary Committee, attempting to undo the decision of that committee that a design patent was not necessary in this case. I would submit further. Mr. President that the design patent is not needed in terms of the work of the organization. The Senator from South Carolina has gone on at great length to talk about the charitable work of the United Daughters of the Confederacy. The fact of the matter is that the refusal to extend this extraordinary honor by this body does not stop them from doing whatever it is they do, from continuing their work in the community and the like. The Senator has not explained, however, why the Daughters need this extraordinary congressional action to continue the work of their organization or protect against the unauthorized use of their insignia. He has not addressed at all the conclusions that have been set forth from the Treasury, which was addressed in the committee, that say it is not only extraordinary but probably inappropriate to have a design patent issued in this regard. When members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy came to my office to discuss this issue when we were involved with consideration of the issue before the Judiciary Committee (Scroll text bottom of screen, "The senate is considering the Helms amendment to the committee substitute amendment to s. 919 the national service bill) they could not even then answer the question why it was necessary to have a design patent. They can continue to fundraise. They can continue to exist. They can continue to use the insignia. Nothing changes in terms of what it is they do. The only issue is whether or not this body is prepared to put its imprimatur on the Confederate insignia used by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. I submit to you, Mr. President, and to the Members who are listening to this debate, as I did in the Judiciary Committee, that the United Daughters of the Confederacy have every right to honor their ancestors and to choose the Confederate flag as their symbol if they like. However, those of us whose ancestors fought on a different side in the Civil War, or who were held, frankly, as human chattel under the Confederate flag, are duty bound to honor our ancestors as well by asking whether such recognition by the U.S. Senate is appropriate. The United Daughters of the Confederacy did not require this action to either conduct the affairs of their organization or to protect their insignia against unauthorized use."
Carol Moseley-Braun speaking against granting a design patent in the use of the Confederate flag
Senator Carol Moseley-Braun continued, "As the patent commissioner, Mr. Kirk, wrote in a letter, issued April, 30, quote, "in the absence of design patent protection and regardless of statutory protection, nonprofit organizations have still other options for obtaining protection for their badges, insignias, logos and names," and so this is not an issue about protecting the insignia of the United Daughters of the Confederacy and nor is it an issue about whether or not they do good works in the community. Nor is it an issue of whether or not the organization has a right to use this insignia. I think the answer in all those cases is they have the right to use whatever insignia they want, they have a right to organize in anyway they want, they have a right to conduct whatever business they want. But at the same time it is inappropriate for this Senate, for this United States Congress to grant a special, an extraordinary impramarter if you will, Mr. President, to assemble, which is as inappropriate to all of us as Americans, as this one is. The daughters, I've heard the arguments on the floor today with regard to the impramarter that's being sought for this organization and for this symbol. And I submit to you, Mr. President, that this is really revisionist history, the fact of the matter is that the emblems of the Confederacy has meaning to Americans even a hundred years after the end of the Civil War. Everybody knows what the confederacy stands for. Everybody knows what the insignia means. That matter of common knowledge is not a surprise to any of us and, and when a former governor stood, raised the confederate battle flag over the Alabama state capitol to protest the federal government's support for civil rights and a visit by the attorney general at the time in 1963. Everybody knew what that meant. Now, in this time, in 1993 when you see the confederate symbols hauled out, everybody knows what that means. And so I submit as Americans we have an obligation, number one to recognize the meaning, not to fall prey to revisionist history on the one hand and also really to make a statement that we believe the civil war is over. We believe that as Americans, we are all Americans and have a need to be respectful of one another, with regard to our respected histories, that just as I would, whether we are black or white or northerner or southerners, all Americans share a common history and we share a common flag. The flag, which is behind you right now, Mr. President is our flag. The flag that is stars and stripes forever is our flag, whether we are from the north or south, whether we are African American or not that is our flag. And to give a design, to give a design patent to flag that that, to give a design patent that even our own flag does not enjoy to a symbol of the confederacy seems to me Mr. President just to be backwards and just to create the kind of divisions in our society that our counterproductive, that are not needed. And so I come back to the point that I raised to begin with, which is what is the point of doing this, why would we give and extraordinary honor to a symbol which is counter the symbol, we as Americans I believe all know and love, which would be a recognition, if you will, of the losing side of the war, a war that I hope, while it is a painful part of our history I hope as Americans we have all gotten past and we can say as Americans we come together under a single flag and if this organization chooses to honor the losing side of the civil war then that's their prerogative. But it is inappropriate for that organization to call on the rest of us, on everybody else, to give our imprimatur to the symbolism of the Confederate flag."
Carol Moseley-Braun speaking against granting a design patent in the use of the Confederate flag
Senator Carol Moseley-Braun continued, "Symbols are important. They speak volumes. They speak volumes to the people in our country. They speak volumes to the people outside of our country who follow and who care about what happens in this, the greatest Nation in the world. It seems to me the time has long passed when we could put behind us the debates and arguments that have raged since the Civil War, that we get beyond the separateness and we get beyond the divisions and we get beyond fanning the flames of racial antagonism. I submit that to use the insignia of the United Daughters is their prerogative to use. However, it is not their prerogative to force me and the other Members of this body to assent to an extraordinary honor of their own revisionist history. That is the purpose of the design patent.
Carol Moseley-Braun speaking against granting a design patent in the use of the Confederate flag
Senator Carol Moseley-Braun continued, "Mr. President, I would like at this time to ask for the admission into the record a letter to me dated April 30, 1993, from Mr. Kirk, of the U.S. Department of Commerce, Patents and Trademark Office. And, while Senator Metzenbaum is on the floor, and I do not know whether he wants to speak or not, I would like to not only to have this letter printed in the Record, but I would like also to share with the membership what is the Patent Office says about design patents. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the letter be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks. (off screen voice: The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered) Mr. President, he answer the question: Is it common practice for nonprofit groups to obtain design patents for their insignia and logos? The answer is this: First, logos are generally words or word combinations and are not articles of manufacture. As a consequence, they cannot be protected by design patents, but may be appropriate subject matter for trademark protection. I point out that this is a design patent involved in this situation. Obtaining design patent protection for a nonprofit group's insignia and emblems used to be more frequent in past years than today. However, obtaining renewal and extension of design patents for the insignia of such groups is the exception rather than the rule. This may well be due to the fact that numerous organizations have acquired exclusive rights to their seals, emblems and badges under title 36, U.S. Code, which pertains to patriotic societies and observances. It should be noted, however, that under this statute some organizations are granted exclusive rights to their names, emblems, seals and badges, while others have exclusive rights to their names only. In other words, what he is saying is that most organizations have other kinds of protections and do not have this design patent, which is sought today by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. He goes on: For example, 36 U.S.C., section 48 confers to the American Legion only the exclusive right to its name. The Boy Scouts have exclusive right to their name. But neither of these organizations enjoy a design patent. He goes on: `In that regard, the Boy Scouts' with regard to their fleur-de-lis emblem did not obtain an extension of the design patent that they had at the turn of the century when it expired. So this organization has now had a design patent, from what I understand, for two renewals and they are extraordinary in their request to have it renewed."
Carol Moseley-Braun speaking against granting a design patent in the use of the Confederate flag
Senator Carol Moseley- Braun continued, "The next question asked in the letter is: Are design patents typically renewed? The answer to this question I think is significant to this body: You are correct in understanding that design patents normally terminate after 14 years and, as a rule, are not renewed. So while I will not finish reading the rest of the letter, because I have no intent right now to stand here and filibuster this issue, I think it is important to note that these patents are rarely renewed. This is more than a second renewal for this organization. It is not necessary to begin with. They can continue to use their insignia. It does not interfere with their fundraising. It does not interfere with their charitable activities. It interferes in no way with their real activities, but rather is a symbolism of what is sought here with this amendment, which is so troublesome. I submit to the body that the Judiciary Committee, in voting 13 to 2, recognized how singularly inappropriate it would be to renew the patent for the United Daughters of the Confederacy and it is singularly inappropriate for this amendment to be accepted. And so Mr. President, I, therefore, move that amendment 610, this amendment, be tabled and I yield to Senator Metzenbaum."