News & Analysis as of

Commercial Speech First Amendment Supreme Court of the United States

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Unprecedented: COVID-19 Litigation Trends - Issue 6

This sixth edition of Unprecedented, our weekly update on COVID-19 litigation, sees us reporting on many of the same types of cases. Consumers continue to seek refunds for goods and services that have been disrupted by the...more

Mintz - Trademark & Copyright Viewpoints

After the Supreme Court Touchdown, Washington Redskins Are Finally Winning at the Fourth Circuit and the PTO

Two incredible things happened in 1992 for the NFL football team Washington Redskins. It won the Super Bowl and applied to register a trademark Washington Redskins. It has not been so lucky ever since. It has not won another...more

CMCP - California Minority Counsel Program

In Matal V. Tam, Scotus Rules Prohibition On Disparaging Trademarks Unconstitutional

The Asian American members of the band the Slants adopted that name to “reclaim” and “take ownership” of the derogatory term. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) refused to register a trademark application...more

Foley Hoag LLP - Making Your Mark

Of Slants, Skins, And Signs: Section 2(a) Prohibition of Disparaging Trademark Registrations Struck Down!

Well, that happened! According to the Supreme Court’s opinion in Matal v. Tam, Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, which purports to prohibit the registration of marks that “disparage . . . persons,” is unconstitutional. ...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Supreme Court Holds that First Amendment Protects Disparaging Trademarks

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court emphasized the importance of broad free speech protection in striking down a statute that allows the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to refuse registration of disparaging trademarks....more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

US Supreme Court’s Ruling Bolsters Taxpayers’ First Amendment Right To Pass Through Fees (and Taxes)

On March 29, 2017, in a unanimous ruling, the US Supreme Court ruled that a New York statute, which prohibits identifying a surcharge to customers for credit card payments, regulates speech and is therefore subject to...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Supreme Court of the United States Holds that New York Law Regarding Credit Card Surcharges Regulates Speech, Remands for Further...

Last week, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the United States held that New York General Business Law Section 518, which provides that "[n]o seller in any sales transaction may impose a surcharge on a holder who...more

Stoel Rives LLP

Credit Card Surcharge Ban on Life Support after Supreme Court Decision

Stoel Rives LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court held last week that New York’s ban on credit card surcharging is a restraint on speech under the First Amendment. Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, No. 15-1391 (U.S. Mar. 29, 2017). The case was...more

BCLP

U.S. Supreme Court Rules NY Surcharge Law Regulates Speech

BCLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that New York’s statutory ban on merchant’s surcharging customers who choose to pay for credit cards is a regulation of speech and is not merely a regulation of pricing conduct, as the...more

Dickinson Wright

Supreme Court Strikes Down Ordinance Regulating Directional Signs

Dickinson Wright on

In the case of Reed v. Town of Gilbert, the United States Supreme Court recently issued a significant decision regarding municipal sign regulation The Town of Gilbert regulated signage differently based on the content of the...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide