News & Analysis as of

Trademarks › United States Patent and Trademark Office › Disparagement

A Trademark is a legally registered distinctive mark or sign which identifies goods, products or services that originate or are associated with a particular person or enterprise . A typical example of a trademark... more +
A Trademark is a legally registered distinctive mark or sign which identifies goods, products or services that originate or are associated with a particular person or enterprise . A typical example of a trademark would be a company's logo such as the Nike "Check" or McDonald's "Golden Arches."  less -
Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Supreme Court to Examine Free Speech Limits in “TRUMP TOO SMALL” Trademark Case

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

The intersection of free speech and private business branding is once again in front of the Supreme Court of the United States. On June 5th, the Supreme Court decided to hear Vidal v. Elster, Case 22-704, an appeal from the...more

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

Fox Rothschild LLP

Redskins Changing Team Name/Logo

Fox Rothschild LLP on

As a surprise to many, the Washington Redskins recently announced that it will be changing its 87-year old name. This decision comes after recent events that sparked nationwide discussions about race and caused various...more

International Lawyers Network

No Longer “FUCT” - Scandalous Mark Provision Struck Down By Supreme Court

International Lawyers Network on

What constitutes a “scandalous” trademark? The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has been grappling with this question since the enactment of the 1905 Trademark Act, later codified in the 1946 Lanham...more

International Lawyers Network

Should Scandalous Trademarks Be Registered?

International Lawyers Network on

Suppose that you want to register a trademark that identifies a source of goods or services for your business. What if the trademark is immoral or scandalous? Should you register your scandalous trademark with the U.S....more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument on “Immoral or Scandalous” Trademark Prohibition

Snell & Wilmer on

Earlier this week, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in Iancu v. Brunetti regarding the constitutionality of the portion of Lanham Act, Section 2(a) (15 U.S.C. § 1052(a)) that prohibits the United...more

Cole Schotz

Scandalous As…

Cole Schotz on

Fuct, a L.A. based clothing brand will be infront of the U.S. Supreme later this month. In the past, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has prohibited registration of marks that constitute immoral or...more

BakerHostetler

Protected or Unprotected: The Supreme Court Hears Iancu v. Brunetti

BakerHostetler on

On April 15, 2019, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether dirty words and vulgar terms may be registrable as trademarks – and if so, what is the test? Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act currently provides that the...more

Mintz - Trademark & Copyright Viewpoints

The FUCT Mark: Is the Prohibition on Scandalous Marks Unconstitutional?

Mintz - Trademark & Copyright Viewpoints on

The constitutionality of yet another portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act will soon be determined. Following in the footsteps of the blockbuster decision in Matal v. Tam, 137 S. Ct. 1744 (2017) (“Tam”), the U.S. Supreme...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

MarkIt to Market - February 2019: Trademark Practice Update: Outrageous! Disgraceful! Appalling!...or is it? SCOTUS to Decide the...

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on

U.S. trademark attorneys received a New Year’s surprise last month when the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear Iancu v. Brunetti, the case that should determine the availability of federal trademark...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court to Address Whether Trademark Protection Is Permitted for Immoral, Scandalous Marks

McDermott Will & Emery on

The Supreme Court of the United States granted the US Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO’s) request that it address whether the prohibition of federal trademark protection for “immoral” or “scandalous” marks is invalid under...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Supreme Court To Decide Whether “Scandalous Clause” Passes Constitutional Muster

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Just over a year ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a century-old ban prohibiting the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) from registering “scandalous” and “immoral” trademarks...more

Kilpatrick

Immoral and Scandalous Trademarks

Kilpatrick on

On January 4, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari filed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark office in Iancu v. Brunetti. The USPTO seeks to overturn the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the prohibition on...more

Cooley LLP

Alert: SCOTUS to Decide If Ban on Scandalous Trademarks Is Unconstitutional

Cooley LLP on

On January 4, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear the United States Patent and Trademark Office's ("USPTO") appeal of In re Brunetti, 877 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2017). In taking this case, it appears...more

Snell & Wilmer

How Scandalous! SCOTUS Again Takes up Whether the Lanham Act Violates the First Amendment

Snell & Wilmer on

On Friday, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear a case that will decide whether the federal ban on trademark protection for “scandalous” material is unconstitutional. In re Brunetti follows the U.S. Patent...more

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

Disparaging, Immoral and Scandalous Trademarks in the Supreme Court: Beyond Tam to Brunetti

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets on

This blog has followed the evolving judicial views concerning disparaging trademarks, culminating in the Supreme Court’s decision in in Matal v. Tam, 137 S. Ct. 1744 (June 19, 2017)....more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The “F Word” Taking Center Stage at the U.S. Supreme Court

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

On Friday, while some of us may have been muttering a few bad words as we slogged through our post-holiday inboxes, the Supreme Court was toying with a naughty word of its own: FUCT. That’s right. Late last week the Court...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Scandalous Trademark Ban

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Just when we thought the unconstitutionality of the ban on disparaging and scandalous trademarks had been resolved, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) is shaking things up....more

Jaburg Wilk

Good Time to Try to Register that “#!$@*!ing” Trademark?

Jaburg Wilk on

On June 19, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq.) in Matal v. Tam (137 S. Ct. 1744), holding that it violates the First Amendment’s free speech clause. ...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

K&L Gates LLP

Trademark Law Update: Federal Circuit Strikes Down Lanham Act’s Ban on “Immoral” or “Scandalous” Marks

K&L Gates LLP on

In June 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court in Matal v. Tam struck down as unconstitutional a provision of section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, which had permitted the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to refuse to register...more

BakerHostetler

Federal Circuit Finds Lanham Act Clause Banning Immoral and Scandalous Trademarks Unconstitutional

BakerHostetler on

On December 15, 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit struck down as unconstitutional the clause within 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a) (“Section 2(a)”) banning registration of a trademark that “[c]onsists of or comprises...more

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

Tam Extended: Prohibition of “Immoral and Scandalous” Trademarks Unconstitutional

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets on

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently extended First Amendment protections for trademark applications in In re Brunetti, No. 15-1109 (Fed. Cir. December 15, 2017), ruling that Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act’s...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Federal Circuit Decision Leaves Lanham Act’s Provision Barring Registration Of Immoral And Scandalous Marks “FUCT”

Fox Rothschild LLP on

It is not often that a court of law can issue a landmark opinion laden with profanity and sexual innuendos. But last Friday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit seized the opportunity in a colorful...more

111 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 5
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