News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › United States Patent and Trademark Office › The Slants

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Bodman

Disparaging, Immoral, and Scandalous Trademarks: Just Because You Can, Doesn’t Mean You Should

Bodman on

At a Glance - Even though the Supreme Court has paved the way for brands to register trademarks that may be considered disparaging, immoral, or scandalous, brand owners are reversing themselves and voluntarily changing....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Circuit Bleeps Lanham Act Ban on Immoral or Scandalous Marks

McDermott Will & Emery on

Following the Supreme Court of the United States’ 2017 decision in Matal v. Tam (i.e., the Slants case) finding the proscription on the registration of disparaging trademarks under § 2(a) of the Lanham Act to be an...more

Mintz - Trademark & Copyright Viewpoints

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

Mintz - Trademark & Copyright Viewpoints on

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

Foster Garvey PC

The Washington Redskins Win Their Trademark Battle in Overtime

Foster Garvey PC on

Simon Tam of the Asian rock band, The Slants, probably was not envisioning an 8-year-long legal battle when he chose the group’s name. Slant is known as a racial slur for Asians. Tam hoped to strip the term of its derogatory...more

CMCP - California Minority Counsel Program

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

CMCP - California Minority Counsel Program on

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

Weintraub Tobin

The First Amendment Protects The Trademark Registrability Of THE SLANTS And THE WASHINGTON REDSKINS Irrespective Of Political...

Weintraub Tobin on

In 2014, the Washington Redskins lost a battle before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) where the petitioner, a group of Native American activists, sought cancellation of the “Washington Redskins” trademark, which...more

McAfee & Taft

Free speech legal battle changes law on disparaging trademarks

McAfee & Taft on

Last month, in Matal v. Tam, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision that struck down a portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act....more

Dickinson Wright

Three Questions from the Supreme Court’s Decision on “Offensive” Trademarks

Dickinson Wright on

Last week the Supreme Court ruled that the Trademark Office may not refuse federal registration to a trademark merely because the mark is “disparaging.” The decision has attracted a lot of media attention, much of it...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Band Trademark Can Rock On: Lanham Act Disparagement Clause Unconstitutional

McDermott Will & Emery on

In an 8–0 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed an en banc panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and found the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act to be facially unconstitutional...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

Supreme Court Rules Trademarks are Protected by First Amendment's Free Speech Clause

Best Best & Krieger LLP on

Trademarks do not constitute government speech, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled. Instead, trademarks qualify as speech protected by the First Amendment Free Speech Clause. As a result, the government cannot reject a...more

Weintraub Tobin

Offensive Trademarks Are Protected Free Speech Under The First Amendment

Weintraub Tobin on

Simon Tam is the lead singer of the rock group call “The Slants’, which is composed of Asian-Americans. Tam applied for federal trademark registration of the band’s name. While the term “slants” is a derogatory term for...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

Trademark Act Offends Free Speech

Amundsen Davis LLC on

The Supreme Court ruled that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) may not deny registration of trademarks on the basis that they are offensive or hateful. As previously discussed, in In re Simon Shiao...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Holds Disparagement Clause Unconstitutional

Perkins Coie on

In a much anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. ___ (June 19, 2017) that a provision of the Lanham Act banning the registration of marks considered disparaging to “persons, institutions,...more

Dickinson Wright

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Trademark Registrations Are Free to Disparage

Dickinson Wright on

Justice Alito’s summary opinion announced in Court Monday morning, in what has come to be known as the Slants case (Matel v. Tam, 582 U.S. ___ (June 19, 2017), was short and sweet but the trademark applications we can expect...more

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

If You Have Nothing Nice to Say, Say ®

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP on

On June 19, the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional a provision of the Lanham Act prohibiting federal registration of disparaging trademarks. The Court’s ruling in Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. ___, No. 15-1298 (June 19,...more

Adler Pollock & Sheehan P.C.

Supreme Court: First Amendment Protects “Disparaging” Trademarks

Adler Pollock & Sheehan P.C. on

Since its enactment as the basic federal law on trademarks in 1946, the Lanham Act has prohibited the registration of “derogatory” trademarks with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). On June 19, 2017, the...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Brands that Bite - The Supreme Court unanimously rules that the First Amendment forbids the Trademark Office from refusing to...

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

By striking down the “disparagement clause,” a 70-year-old provision of federal trademark law, the Supreme Court’s ruling this week in Matal v. Tam has the potential to change the ways in which people conceive, market,...more

Vedder Price

The Slants Win in Matal v. Tam: Trademark Registration Cannot Be Denied for Offensive Terms

Vedder Price on

On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court held that a portion of the first clause of the U.S. Trademark Law (the “Lanham Act”), which is commonly known as the disparagement clause, was facially unconstitutional under...more

Lewitt Hackman

Disparaging, Degrading, Derogatory Trademarks: They're Now Enforceable Says Supreme Court

Lewitt Hackman on

You may remember that several national sports franchises are under fire for trademarks and branding that is seen to be racially disparaging. The Washington Redskins are the first team to come to mind, and it wasn’t too long...more

Jones Day

Siding with The Slants: Ban on Disparaging Marks Held Unconstitutional

Jones Day on

Asian rock band The Slants is no longer "The Band Who Must Not Be Named," as they titled their most recent album. On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Matal v. Tam, striking a provision of the Lanham Act,...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

McCarter & English, LLP

Your New ®Ight To Disparage – A Look Inside “The Slants” Lanham Act Decision

McCarter & English, LLP on

The Federal trademark statute’s more-than-60-year prohibition on registering trademarks that may be viewed as disparaging goes out the window with the United States Supreme Court’s recent unanimous decision. The Court ruled...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Slanting Toward The End Of The Commercial Speech Doctrine

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Amid the hullabaloo over the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision this week in Matal v. Tam, a much broader and potentially more significant development might be overlooked. It shouldn’t be. The case involved Simon Tam’s band...more

Genova Burns LLC

Update: Ban on Registering “Disparaging” Trademarks Unconstitutional

Genova Burns LLC on

In a unanimous opinion based on differing rationale, the Supreme Court held that the federal prohibition on registering “disparaging” trademarks is unconstitutional. (Matal v. Tam, No. 15-1293)....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

The Supreme Court Holds the Lanham Act’s Disparagement Clause Unconstitutional

Robins Kaplan LLP on

In a closely watched decision, the eight participating members of the Supreme Court unanimously held that the so-called disparagement clause of the Lanham Act violates the First Amendment. The high-profile case of Matan v....more

65 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3
Next »

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide