Trademarks, USPTO, Music Industry

K&C Sports & Entertainment Law Weekly Roundup - July 2024 #2

Kaufman & Canoles on 7/9/2024

The legislature of New York’s Nassau County passed a law on Monday to ban women’s and girls’ sports teams from using sports facilities in the county on Long Island unless they exclude transgender girls and women from playing....more

What’s Trending in Trademarks, May 2024: Taylor Swift Fans Analyze Latest Trademark Filing; San Francisco Sues Over San Francisco...

Erise IP on 5/21/2024

Every month, Erise’s trademark attorneys review the latest developments at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, in the courts, and across the corporate world to bring you the stories that you should know about: Taylor...more

The Legal Dance Off Over the “MJ” Trademark

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on 5/10/2024

Before we start the show, the casts of characters may drive you Off the Wall, so here’s a little primer to help you: Triumph International, Inc. (“Triumph”) is a merchandise licensing company for the estate of Michael...more

MarkIt to Market® - May 2022

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on 5/26/2022

Thank you for reading the May 2022 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we discuss Spotify's exploration into NFTs, two new USPTO policies with practical implications for trademark applicants...more

The Pitch - April 2022

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP on 4/28/2022

The Pitch newsletter is a monthly update of legal issues and news affecting or related to the music, film and television, fine arts, media, professional athletics, eSports, and gaming industries. The Pitch features a diverse...more

Jam Brands: Why Bands Should File for Federal Trademark Registration

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP on 4/13/2022

Consumers do not associate the names Phish, Grateful Dead, and Moon Taxi with an animal, a scary movie, and a spaceship. Instead, these names likely recall the bands’ popular songs, albums, and memorable concerts....more

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

Bodman on 9/8/2021

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

Proud to Be an American God Bless The USA, But Not Functioning as A Trademark

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets on 12/7/2020

In a precedential decision, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) affirmed the refusal to register the trademark GOD BLESS THE USA for home decor items on the ground...more

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

CMCP - California Minority Counsel Program on 8/22/2017

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

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

Weintraub Tobin on 7/24/2017

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

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

Dickinson Wright on 7/12/2017

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

Band Trademark Can Rock On: Lanham Act Disparagement Clause Unconstitutional

McDermott Will & Emery on 7/11/2017

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

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

Best Best & Krieger LLP on 7/7/2017

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

Offensive Trademarks Are Protected Free Speech Under The First Amendment

Weintraub Tobin on 7/7/2017

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

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

Dickinson Wright on 6/28/2017

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

If You Have Nothing Nice to Say, Say ®

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP on 6/27/2017

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

Supreme Court: First Amendment Protects “Disparaging” Trademarks

Adler Pollock & Sheehan P.C. on 6/27/2017

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

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 6/27/2017

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

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

Lewitt Hackman on 6/26/2017

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

Siding with The Slants: Ban on Disparaging Marks Held Unconstitutional

Jones Day on 6/24/2017

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

Supreme Court Holds that First Amendment Protects Disparaging Trademarks

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on 6/23/2017

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

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

McCarter & English, LLP on 6/23/2017

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

Slanting Toward The End Of The Commercial Speech Doctrine

Fox Rothschild LLP on 6/23/2017

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

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

Robins Kaplan LLP on 6/22/2017

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

SCOTUS: Supreme Court Holds Disparagement Clause of the Lanham Act Violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 6/22/2017

On June 19, 2017, in Matal v. Tam, previously Lee v. Tam, the Supreme Court handed down its most impactful interpretation of the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act to date by holding that at its intersection with the...more

Trademarks › United States Patent and Trademark Office › Music Industry

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