It is well known that the trademark laws of the United States differ substantially from the trademark laws of countries around the world. The United States Supreme Court recently clarified that ‘offensive’ trademarks are registrable, further differentiating the United States from the majority the world.
Morality Refusals
Many jurisdictions have prohibitions against registration of marks that are considered offensive, immoral, or contrary to the public order. Council Regulation (EC) No. 207/2009, Article 7(1)(f) provides an absolute ground for refusal of “trade marks which are contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality.” While the specific laws regarding morality of individual member states are not necessarily binding on EUIPO (formerly OHIM), they can be persuasive evidence of how a mark would be received by the public.
Similarly, Section 9(1)(j) of the Canada Trade-marks Act (R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13) prohibits the registration of “any scandalous, obscene or immoral word or device.” Brazil, India, Taiwan, and many other jurisdictions enforce similar clauses.[1]
The United States has a similar prohibition. 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a) prohibits the registration of any mark that “consists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter; or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute…” On June 19, 2017, the Supreme Court determined that the ‘Disparagement Clause’ of Section 1052 was unconstitutional.
Read more: http://www.ilnipinsider.com/2017/07/matal-v-tam-disparaging-trademarks-are-registrable/
Please see full publication below for more information.
