News & Analysis as of

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board First Amendment United States Patent and Trademark Office

Morrison & Foerster LLP

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

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

Fox Rothschild LLP

Supreme Court Rejects TRUMP TOO SMALL Trademark

Fox Rothschild LLP on

“TRUMP TOO SMALL”- This is the trademark that Steve Elster has been trying to get registered for the past six years since filing his trademark application all the way back in January 2018, during the Trump presidency. Since...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

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

What’s in a Name? Too Much to Trademark According to the USPTO

With the U.S. Supreme Court beginning a new session, many are wondering what new issues the Court will address this term. One case the Court is scheduled to hear involves the relationship between the Lanham Act and First...more

Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC

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

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

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

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

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

McDermott Will & Emery

Oh, Fudge. TTAB Finds Curse Word Fails to Function as Trademark

The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) denied registration of several US trademark applications for the mark FUCK, even though the applicant had overcome a prohibition on the registration of “immoral or scandalous” trademarks...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Rights of Privacy and Publicity TOO SMALL to Overcome First Amendment Freedom of Speech

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

During the 2016 presidential primaries, then presidential candidates Donald Trump and Senator Marco Rubio exchanged insults, with Trump calling Rubio “Little Marco” and Rubio commenting on the size of Trumps hands. Recently,...more

Fenwick & West LLP

The First Amendment Trumps Another Restriction on Trademark Registrations

Fenwick & West LLP on

On February 24, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in In Re: Elster, overturned the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s (TTAB) refusal to grant a trademark registration on the phrase “TRUMP TOO SMALL” for...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

The Federal Circuit Deals Another Blow to the Lanham Act, Finding Section 2(c) Unconstitutional as Applied to a Refusal to...

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) reversed a TTAB decision affirming a refusal to register the phrase TRUMP TOO SMALL because it “comprises the name of [former] President Donald...more

Knobbe Martens

First Amendment Trumps Statutory Ban on Trademark Registration

Knobbe Martens on

IN RE STEVE ELSTER - Before Dyk, Taranto, and Chen.  Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Patent and Trademark Office violated the First Amendment by refusing to register the trademark TRUMP...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

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban on Offensive Trademarks

On June 24, 2019 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...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...

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

Federal Circuit Bleeps Lanham Act Ban on Immoral or Scandalous Marks

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

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

Bracewell LLP

Scandalous and Immoral Trademarks Awarded First Amendment Protection

Bracewell LLP on

On December 15, the Federal Circuit held that the prohibition on the registration of scandalous and immoral trademarks is unconstitutional because it violates the First Amendment. In re Brunetti, No. 2015-1109, 2017 WL...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

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

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

40 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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