As a surprise to many, the Washington Redskins recently announced that it will be changing its 87-year old name. This decision comes after recent events that sparked nationwide discussions about race and caused various corporate sponsors to exert pressure on the Redskins’ organization. But it also comes after years of the Redskins fighting to protect
Matal v. Tam
Immoral & Scandalous Marks Survive
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 certain ideas and thus discriminates based on viewpoint. Practically, this means that the United States Patent and…
Fourth Circuit Finally Rules on Washington Redskins Trademark Case
In what may be the final installment of a series of blog posts related to the Lanham Act’s disparaging trademark ban and its effect on the Washington Redskins’ trademarks, the Fourth Circuit finally issued a decision in the Redskins’ case. When the United States Supreme Court ruled last June in a case involving the Slants…
After Matal v. Tam, Federal Circuit Rules on “Immoral” and “Scandalous” Trademarks
Continuing my ongoing coverage of the Lanham Act’s disparaging trademark ban, the Federal Circuit ruled today that the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2017 ruling striking down the ban on disparaging trademarks also applies to the ban on “immoral” and “scandalous” trademarks set forth in section 2(a) of the Lanham Act. Applying First Amendment free…
Slanting Toward the End of the Commercial Speech Doctrine
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 “The Slants,” and as our Elizabeth Patton wrote earlier this week, it invalidated the Lanham Act’s prohibition…