Legal News

Federal Court to Decide Whether Immoral Trademarks Violate the First Amendment
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...

A federal court will determine whether “smutty” or “immoral” trademarks may be banned.

Summary: A federal court will determine whether “smutty” or “immoral” trademarks may be banned.

According to CorpCounsel.com, the U.S. Court of Appeals will soon decide whether banning “smutty” or “immoral” trademarks is a violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

  
What
Where


The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office refused to allow Katy Perry to trademark “Left Shark.”

The federal court recently supported the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s decision to deny registration for the trademark “The Slants.” In its refusal, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office noted Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, which says that trademarks shall be rejected if they are comprised of “immoral, deceptive or scandalous matter” that denigrates people or entities, bringing them into “contempt or disrepute.” According to Reuters, the Asian-American band was denied the trademark because its name disparaged those of Asian ethnicity.

A group of law schools has joined the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office pilot program.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!




Michael Palmisciano of Sullivan & Worcester explains, “In their briefs, the parties are to specifically address the following issue: Does the bar to registration of disparaging marks … violate the First Amendment?” The pending decision could have a significant impact on trademark law, especially if the court finds the ban unconstitutional. For example, trademarks such as “Redskins” may be acceptable, according to TrendingTrademarks.com. Additionally, Palmisciano said that, even though the court is not addressing “scandalous” and “immoral” marks, the court may include these issues in its decision.

Palmisciano

Palmisciano



Do you think the court will ban the trademarks?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Last year, the trademark “Redskins” was rejected.

Source: CorpCounsel.com

Photo credit: trademarkapplicationhq.com, sandw.com (Palmisciano)

 



 

Interesting Legal Sites You May Like


BCG FEATURED JOB

Locations:

Keyword:



Search Now

Mid-level Tax Associate Attorney

USA-CA-Los Angeles

Los Angeles office of an AmLaw firm seeks mid-level tax associate attorney with 3-5 years of experie...

Apply Now

Real Estate/Transactional Attorney

USA-PA-Camp Hill

Camp Hill office of our client seeks real estate/transactional attorney with experience. The candida...

Apply Now

Corporate Attorney

USA-WY-Laramie

Laramie office of our client seeks corporate attorney with 2+ years of experience.

Apply Now

RELEVANT JOBS

Construction Attorney

USA-FL-Deerfield Beach

Highly regarded, AV-rated law firm seeks Construction Litigation Associate with a minimum of 5 years...

Apply now

Family Law Firm seeks Associate Attorney

USA-WA-Vancouver

Are you ready to excel at the highest levels of family law? Do you prefer a dynamic, energetic pract...

Apply now

Legal Secretary

USA-NY-Buffalo

Legal Secretary for small but busy law firm in downtown Buffalo, primarily handling real estate matt...

Apply now

Commercial Real Estate Attorney

USA-AL-Huntsville

Benefits Offered 401K, Dental, Medical, Vision Employment Type Full-Time Leo Law Firm, L...

Apply now

SEARCH IN ARCHIVE

To Top