Quantcast
Connect with us

US appeals court says government cannot censor offensive trademarks

Published

on

A US appeals court on Tuesday struck down a provision of a federal law that barred the registration of offensive trademarks because it violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., vacates the refusal by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to register the name of the Asian-American rock band, The Slants. It could also affect the decision by the agency to cancel the trademarks of the National Football League’s Washington Redskins.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We recognize that invalidating this provision may lead to the wider registration of marks that offend vulnerable communities,” Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore said in the opinion on behalf of the 12 judges who took part in hearing the case.

“Whatever our personal feelings about the mark at issue here, or other disparaging marks, the First Amendment forbids government regulators to deny registration because they find the speech likely to offend others,” she wrote.

The Portland, Oregon-based band, which plays what it calls “Chinatown dance rock,” appealed because the trademark agency had rejected its name for a trademark twice since 2010 on the grounds that it disparages Asians.

Supported by the American Civil Liberties Union, Slants front man Simon Tam argued the band adopted the name as a way to reclaim the racial slur and should be allowed an official trademark.

In April, a three-judge Federal Circuit panel upheld the agency’s rejection, but the court then vacated that decision in order to tackle the prickly constitutional question.

ADVERTISEMENT

Tuesday’s ruling that the law is unconstitutional now sends the case back to the Patent and Trademark Office for further proceedings.

Interest in the case is high because the more high-profile Redskins case is also currently on appeal at the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia.

(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and James Dalgleish)

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump declares impeachment ‘dead’ — and demands apology — in late night Twitter outburst

Published

on

President Donald Trump lashed out on his favorite social media platform late Thursday evening.

Eight minutes before midnight eastern time, Trump unloaded.

Trump wrote, "Democrats must apologize to USA: Ukrainian Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said that 'United States Ambassador Gordon Sondland did NOT link financial military assistance to a request for Ukraine to open up an investigation into former V.P. Joe Biden & his son, Hunter Biden. Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigation.'”

Trump did not say why he was taking the word of a foreign official over multiple sworn testimonies from members of his own administration.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Pelosi is ‘marrying up the facts and the law’: Ex-prosecutor says ‘bribery’ is a critical indictment of Trump

Published

on

Speaker Nancy Pelosi was masterful in using the word "bribery" to describe President Donald Trump's actions with Ukraine that are at the heart of the impeachment inquiry, according to a former federal prosecutor.

MSNBC anchor Brian Williams interviewed former Assistant U.S. Attorney Berit Berger on Thursday evening's "The Last Word."

Please expand for us on why it is significant and why is it important to label this bribery," Williams said.

"So I think Nancy Pelosi was very specific in calling this bribery for two reasons," Berger replied.

"The first is that -- unlike quid pro quo -- ribery is something that most people understand, especially people who have children," she said, with a chuckle. "We all sort of have a general understanding of that."

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Taylor Swift takes on former record label — and #IStandWithTaylor trends on Twitter

Published

on

Taylor Swift on Thursday publicly reignited her battle with the heads of her former label, saying it is threatening to bar her from going through with an upcoming performance and Netflix documentary over her plans to re-record her early albums.

Earlier this year the superstar began feuding with industry mogul Scooter Braun over his purchase of her former label for more than a decade, the Nashville-based Big Machine, which gave him a majority stake in the master recordings of her first six albums.

Swift said she would begin re-recording her early albums to create copies she owns herself, saying her contract allows her to begin re-doing albums one through five in November 2020, when she plans to be back in the studio doing just that.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image