News & Analysis as of

United States Patent and Trademark Office › Supreme Court of the United States › Trademark Registration

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves a fundamental role in the U.S. intellectual property system by issuing patents and registering trademarks.... more +
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves a fundamental role in the U.S. intellectual property system by issuing patents and registering trademarks.    less -
Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Supreme Court Doesn’t Want to Play the Name Game: Prohibition Against Using a Person’s Name in a Registered Mark Without Consent...

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on

On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court held that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering trademarks utilizing another person's name without consent was constitutional. In Vidal v. Elster 602 U. S. ____ (2024), the Supreme...more

Haug Partners LLP

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Names Clause in Trump Too Small Decision

Haug Partners LLP on

Referred to as the “names clause”, the Lanham Act prohibits registration of a mark that consists of or comprises a name that identifies a particular living individual without written consent.1 This includes full names,...more

Holland & Knight LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Federal Trademark Statute's "Names Clause"

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected a First Amendment challenge to the "names clause" of the Lanham Act on June 13, 2024. See Vidal v. Elster, No. 22-704. The names clause prohibits federally registering a trademark...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Trademarking History: Justices Uphold Names Clause, Clash Over Reasoning

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Vidal v. Elster, a case that pitted trademark law against the First Amendment’s free speech protections. While the Court unanimously upheld the Patent and...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Lanham Act’s Personal Names Restriction Does Not Violate First Amendment

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

As expected, based on the tenor of the Justices’ questions during oral argument, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against a trademark applicant seeking to register a mark commenting on former President Donald Trump. The...more

Genova Burns LLC

Unanimous But Fractured: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of “Trump Too Small” Trademark, With Little Guidance for the Future

Genova Burns LLC on

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Vidal v. Ester, 602 U.S. ___ (2024) that the federal prohibition on registering trademarks that identify a living individual without their consent does not violate the First...more

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

SCOTUS Rules on "Trump Too Small"—Third Recent Ruling on First Amendment Implications for Lanham Act 

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

The June 13, 2024, U.S. Supreme Court decision in Vidal v. Elster made waves in the trademark community. All of the Court’s decisions are significant, and this matter was of particular interest because the decision marked the...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

From Rubio's Joke to the Supreme Court: The Journey of 'Trump Too Small' in Vidal v. Elster

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Does the Lanham Act’s restriction on registration of trademarks that include an individual’s name without the consent of such individual violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, even when the mark expresses...more

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

Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2023 Decisions (8th Edition)

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

2023 saw a return to business as usual for the Federal Circuit. Oral arguments are once again in-person and open to the public, and the Court has resumed its former practice of holding occasional sittings outside of...more

Pillsbury - Internet & Social Media Law Blog

Supreme Court Weighs Whether Refusing to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL Trademark Violates First Amendment

Pillsbury - Internet & Social Media Law Blog on

On November 1, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court engaged in a thought-provoking deliberation concerning the intersection of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and U.S. trademark law, Vidal v. Elster, Supr. Ct. Case No....more

Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC

Could Trump Too Small Shrink Free Speech Rights In The Trademark Application Process?

Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC on

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on November 1, 2023 for Vidal v. Elster, a case that questions whether an application to register “TRUMP TOO SMALL” as a mark can be refused registration, or whether such a refusal...more

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

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

Is Trademark Law ‘Too Small' for the First Amendment? - Katten Kattwalk | Issue 25

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP on

During the 2016 presidential debate, Senator Marco Rubio taunted Donald Trump for having “small hands.” Now, more than seven years later, progressive activist Steve Elster is continuing his fight to trademark the phrase...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

SCOTUS To Examine Whether First Amendment “Trumps” Lanham Act

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court continues to show interest in trademark issues with its recent grant of certiorari in another case pitting the Lanham Act against the First Amendment....more

Epstein Becker & Green

How Big a Deal Is “Trump Too Small”? – SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

The question of whether a would-be trademark, “TRUMP TOO SMALL,” warrants a First Amendment exception to the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering a living person’s name as a trademark without that person’s permission has...more

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

MarkIt to Market® - May 2023

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

Thank you for reading the May 2023 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we discuss Taco Bell's attempt to cancel two TACO TUESDAY trademark registrations, and a precedential TTAB decision...more

AEON Law

Patent Poetry: Federal Circuit Allows “Trump Too Small” Trademark

AEON Law on

The Federal Circuit has denied a petition for a rehearing of its February decision reversing the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) rejection of registration for the proposed mark “TRUMP TOO SMALL.” In 2018, Steve...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

McDermott Will & Emery

Special Report - 2020 IP Law Year in Review: Trademarks

McDermott Will & Emery on

2020 was a year like no other, so you’d be forgiven if the year’s biggest headlines in trademark law didn’t quite catch your attention. In 2020, the US Supreme Court shaped trademark jurisprudence through a trio of notable...more

Jones Day

JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021

Jones Day on

Jones Day's Meredith Wilkes and Anna Raimer discuss 2020's most significant developments in trademark law and preview what's to come in 2021, including possible progress in Washington on the highly anticipated Trademark...more

McAfee & Taft

What this year’s Supreme Court opinions mean for you

McAfee & Taft on

2020 was a tumultuous year. And while you were busy shifting to online meetings, implementing new measures to keep employees and customers safe, and otherwise adapting to the challenges created by the coronavirus, the U.S....more

Fox Rothschild LLP

PTO Offers Guidance Following The Decision In USPTO v. Booking.com

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Last month, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) issued a guidance document describing how they plan on following the Supreme Court’s recent decision in U.S. Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com. This document...more

Gould + Ratner LLP

Trademark Guidance Supports U.S. Supreme Court’s Booking.com Ruling For Domain Name Trademark Registration

Gould + Ratner LLP on

The US Patent and Trademark Office issued Examination Guide 3-20 on Oct. 28 to clarify procedures that trademark examiners should follow in view of the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2020 ruling. As we discussed in a previous...more

Mintz - Trademark & Copyright Viewpoints

U.S. Trademark Office Issues Guide on How It Will Apply the Supreme Court’s Booking.com Decision to Examination of Relevant...

Mintz - Trademark & Copyright Viewpoints on

As we reported in our July 7, 2020 blog post on the USPTO v. Booking.com B.V decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a proposed mark consisting of the combination of a generic term and a generic top-level domain, like...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Supreme Court: Generic Word Combined With ‘.com’ Held Trademark Eligible

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

In U.S. Patent & Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V., the Supreme Court held, in an 8-1 decision, that a generic word combined with the top-level domain “.com” can be a federally protectable trademark if it has secondary...more

212 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 9
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