Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Mon Jun 19, 2017, 10:39 AM Jun 2017

Supreme Court rules the government can't refuse to register trademarks considered offensive

Last edited Mon Jun 19, 2017, 12:00 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: Politico


By JOSH GERSTEIN 06/19/2017 10:22 AM EDT

The Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional the federal government’s practice of refusing to register trademarks that officials deem to be offensive.

The justices ruled in favor of Simon Tam, the front man for an all-Asian-American rock band known as “The Slants.” The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had refused to register the name, citing a law that denied trademarks that disparage individuals, institutions, beliefs or national symbols.

The result in the closely-watched case could doom legal challenges to other trademarks many consider offensive, such as that for the Washington Redskins football team.

###

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/19/supreme-court-rules-slants-case-239711



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Slants Win Supreme Court Battle Over Band's Name In Trademark Dispute

June 19, 201710:29 AM ET

Members of the Asian-American rock band The Slants have the right to call themselves by a disparaging name, the Supreme Court says, in a ruling that could have broad impact on how the First Amendment is applied in other trademark cases.

The Slants' frontman, Simon Tam, filed a lawsuit after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office kept the band from registering its name and rejected its appeal, citing the Lanham Act, which prohibits any trademark that could "disparage ... or bring ... into contempt or disrepute" any "persons, living or dead," as the court states.

After a federal court agreed with Tam and his band, the Patent and Trade Office sued to avoid being compelled to register its name as a trademark. On Monday, the Supreme Court sided with The Slants.

"The disparagement clause violates the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause," Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his opinion for the court. Contrary to the Government's contention, trademarks are private, not government speech."

The band has said it wanted to reclaim what is often seen as a slur.

more
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/19/533514196/the-slants-win-supreme-court-battle-over-bands-name-in-trademark-dispute
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court rules the government can't refuse to register trademarks considered offensive (Original Post) DonViejo Jun 2017 OP
I'm not really a fan of the government determining what's offensive or not NobodyHere Jun 2017 #1
Then the only thing left is to hit their pocketbook HAB911 Jun 2017 #2
Boycott the US Patent & Trademark Office? Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2017 #8
the Supreme Court too melm00se Jun 2017 #9
Not sure one can really boycott the Supremes, either... nt Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2017 #10
It was an 8-0 case (nt) TupperHappy Jun 2017 #15
Redskins HAB911 Jun 2017 #13
Oh, well... The article was about The Slants, Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2017 #16
another 8-0 shutout melm00se Jun 2017 #3
great decision snooper2 Jun 2017 #4
+1 Agreed. Those who disagree need to remember that free speech goes both ways - jonno99 Jun 2017 #11
+1 we don't have the right to 'not be offended' FLPanhandle Jun 2017 #18
I hope then that Jon Stewart mac56 Jun 2017 #5
If you like 80's synthpop, they're pretty good. Kind of like the cure if Robert was on uppers. Stryst Jun 2017 #6
This was the case the Washington Redskins were banking on. Calista241 Jun 2017 #7
+++++++++++ HAB911 Jun 2017 #14
I agree broadcaster90210 Jun 2017 #12
Here's a link to the opinion: mahatmakanejeeves Jun 2017 #17
Good. The government shouldn't be in the business of determining 'offensiveness'. n/t X_Digger Jun 2017 #19
just because they have a trademark does not mean you have to buy the product dembotoz Jun 2017 #20
I am happy for my friends The Slants! yuiyoshida Jun 2017 #21
Hi Yui! I've been wondering, ever since I first heard about this case, Coventina Jun 2017 #22
not sure about that... yuiyoshida Jun 2017 #23
Cool! Thanks!! Coventina Jun 2017 #24
 

Dr Hobbitstein

(6,568 posts)
16. Oh, well... The article was about The Slants,
Mon Jun 19, 2017, 03:32 PM
Jun 2017

An Asian-American music act. I didn't realize you were talking about a football team.

melm00se

(4,986 posts)
3. another 8-0 shutout
Mon Jun 19, 2017, 11:05 AM
Jun 2017

"Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend."

everyone needs to keep that quote from this Matal v Tam ruling.

jonno99

(2,620 posts)
11. +1 Agreed. Those who disagree need to remember that free speech goes both ways -
Mon Jun 19, 2017, 12:50 PM
Jun 2017

if someone chooses to be offensive, the "offended" also have the right to picket, boycott, deride, etc.

But we don't have the right to 'not be offended' (where would it end?).

Stryst

(714 posts)
6. If you like 80's synthpop, they're pretty good. Kind of like the cure if Robert was on uppers.
Mon Jun 19, 2017, 11:29 AM
Jun 2017

Their newest album was called "The band who shall not be named". I saw them live at Sakura-Con a couple of years ago.

Calista241

(5,586 posts)
7. This was the case the Washington Redskins were banking on.
Mon Jun 19, 2017, 11:55 AM
Jun 2017

Now they get to keep the name with no recourse from the government. It's up to consumers to not buy their stuff or go to their games.

broadcaster90210

(333 posts)
12. I agree
Mon Jun 19, 2017, 01:17 PM
Jun 2017

The gov't should not police morals and this is a First Amendment issue ad it involves government restriction of speech.

Coventina

(27,063 posts)
22. Hi Yui! I've been wondering, ever since I first heard about this case,
Wed Jun 21, 2017, 12:11 PM
Jun 2017

if their name was a playful homage to the Slits, the all-girl punk band from the 1970s?

I'm very glad they won their case!!!!

They're a great band!!!

yuiyoshida

(41,818 posts)
23. not sure about that...
Wed Jun 21, 2017, 08:10 PM
Jun 2017

These guys probably grew up in the 70s and 80s...so its possible but its more likely they chose the name for political reasons..a political experiment I guess. If i find an interview with them I will post it.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court rules the g...