News & Analysis as of

Scandalous/Immoral Marks Lanham Act First Amendment

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

Pillsbury - Internet & Social Media Law Blog

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

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

Tarter Krinsky & Drogin LLP

Significant 2019 Trademark Developments

In the past calendar year, we saw several significant decisions from the Supreme Court pertaining to trademarks. In Iancu v. Brunetti, 139 S. Ct. 2294, the Supreme Court took another step in dismantling the prohibitions on...more

Kilpatrick

5 Key Takeaways - Annual Review of Key Trademark & Unfair Competition Opinions

Kilpatrick on

Kilpatrick Townsend partner Ted Davis recently presented his “Annual Review of Key Trademark & Unfair Competition Opinions” at the firm’s 2019 Advanced Trademark Law Seminar in San Francisco. Key takeaways from the...more

Fenwick & West LLP

SCOTUS Gives a “FUCT” in Brunetti: First Amendment Supports “Immoral” or “Scandalous” Trademarks

Fenwick & West LLP on

On June 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Iancu v. Brunetti, struck down the Lanham Act’s prohibition on the registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks. Justice Kagan wrote for the 6-3 majority, holding that the...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Intellectual Property Bulletin - Summer 2019

Fenwick & West LLP on

In This Issue - A Looming AI War: Transparency v. IP Rights - As artificial intelligence systems become more prevalent in daily life, efforts to create a unifying set of AI principles have intensified. In the past few...more

International Lawyers Network

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

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

McDermott Will & Emery

Immoral No More: SCOTUS Strikes Down Ban on Registration of Offensive Trademarks

In a 6–3 opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed a 2017 US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision holding the ban on registration of immoral or scandalous trademarks under the Lanham Act to be an...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

SCOTUS Paves the Way for FUCT Trademark, Causing a Bit of an Application Sh**storm at the USPTO

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

“FUCT.”  You can pronounce it as four letters, one after the other.  Or you can pronounce it like Justice Kagan as the “past participle form of a well-known word of profanity.”  Either way, the word can be registered as a...more

Goulston & Storrs PC

Stay in the Know: Recent Developments in Trademark Law

Goulston & Storrs PC on

Retailers generally appreciate that their brands are among their most valuable assets. But it can be challenging for them to know how current trademark law will affect their selection, registration, and enforcement of those...more

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

Supreme Court Ruling Allows Registration of “Scandalous” or “Immoral” Trademarks

Last week, on June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Lanham Act’s “immoral or scandalous” bar to trademark registration constitutes viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment, and thus...more

Lathrop GPM

Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban on "Immoral" or "Scandalous" Trademarks

Lathrop GPM on

In a decision that is likely to trigger a rush to register trademarks that may be seen as obscene, vulgar, or profane, the U.S. Supreme Court recently determined, in a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Elena Kagan, that a...more

Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP

Client Alert: The Trademarks THE SLANTS, REDSKINS and Now FUCT Are Registerable Trademarks Following the Supreme Court’s Iancu v....

In permitting the registration of the “vulgar” term FUCT, the Supreme Court recently extended its 2016 ruling from Matal v. Tam, which allowed the registration of the trademark THE SLANTS for an Asian-American rock band...more

Tarter Krinsky & Drogin LLP

The Supreme Court Says Yes To "Seven Dirty Words"

The road to permitting the registration of George Carlin's "seven dirty words" began in 2017, with the Supreme Court holding unconstitutional the Trademark Act's prohibition against registration of trademarks which are...more

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

Supreme Court Holds Ban on Immoral or Scandalous Trademarks Unconstitutional

On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court, in Iancu v. Brunetti, reviewing the trademark application for “FUCT”, held that the Lanham’s Act’s provision, prohibiting the registration of “immoral[] or scandalous”...more

Foley Hoag LLP - Making Your Mark

Son of Tam: Supreme Court Strikes Down Lanham Act Section 2(a) For "Immoral" and "Scandalous" Marks

In our prior blog entries... we followed the course of Matal v. Tam, the case involving the mark “THE SLANTS.” In that case, the Supreme Court struck down a portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a), on...more

ArentFox Schiff

Supreme Court Rules Ban on ‘Immoral or Scandalous’ Trademarks Unconstitutional

ArentFox Schiff on

On Monday, the Supreme Court held that the ban on “immoral or scandalous” trademarks was unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The Court found that, as with the recently struck down ban on “disparaging” marks, the ban...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Lanham Act’s Prohibition Of Immoral And Scandalous Marks Is Officially “FUCT”

Fox Rothschild LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court this week officially pulled the plug on the Lanham Act’s prohibition on the registration of trademarks that comprise “immoral” or “scandalous” matter on First Amendment grounds. The prohibition, found...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Scandalous Marks? Nothing the Proverbial Bar of Soap Can’t Fix

Earlier this week the United States Supreme Court struck down a century-old provision in the Lanham Act that banned the registration of marks deemed “immoral” or “scandalous.” By a 6-3 vote, the Court found in Iancu v....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban on "Immoral and Scandalous" Trademarks

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in Iancu v. Brunetti, No. 18-302, finding that the Lanham Act prohibition against registration of scandalous or immoral trademarks violates the First Amendment of the U.S....more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Immoral & Scandalous Marks Survive

Fox Rothschild LLP on

It’s old news by now, but the Supreme Court ruled earlier this week that the immoral and scandalous trademark ban set forth in Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act is unconstitutional under the First Amendment because it disfavors...more

K&L Gates LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban on "Immoral" or "Scandalous"

K&L Gates LLP on

On June 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Iancu v. Brunetti that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks violates the First Amendment....more

Alston & Bird

The First Amendment Wins Again: Supreme Court Holds “Immoral” and “Scandalous” Trademarks Are Registrable

Alston & Bird on

Following its decision on The Slants two years ago, the Supreme Court again lands on the side of free speech in Iancu v. Brunetti. Our Intellectual Property – Trademark & Copyright Group discusses the case of the FUCT...more

Dickinson Wright

Why the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision to Allow Federal Registration of FUCT Impacts Everyday Businesses

Dickinson Wright on

On June 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Iancu v Brunetti that prohibiting federal registration of “immoral or scandalous” marks violates the free speech provisions of the First Amendment. ...more

McCarter & English, LLP

“F” Word Doesn’t Faze Supreme Court – Supreme Court Says USPTO Cannot Refuse To Grant Trademarks Merely Because They Contain...

George Carlin famously observed that there are seven words you can’t say on TV. Erik Brunetti didn’t get the message and thus sought to register a trademark for a line of clothing called “FUCT.” The U.S. Patent and Trademark...more

70 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"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