So, . . . like, . . . a band in Portland, Oregon comprising some musicians of Asian descent called itself "The Slants". And, anticipating stardom and the riches which that might bestow upon them the band had applied for a trademark on the name "The Slants".
But the Patent and Trademark Office denied the registration of "The Slants" based upon §2(a) of the Federal Trademark Law which excludes the registration of “scandalous, immoral, or disparaging marks.” Among other things, that provision covers marks that a “substantial composite of the referenced group” perceives as disparaging a religion, nation, ethnic group, belief system, and the like.
This is the same Law which the Patent and Trademark Office cited when it recently cancelled the registration of "The Redskins"
This morning, 22 December 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held (in the application of the Law to "The Slants"), by a 9-to-3 vote, that this exclusion of “disparaging” marks violated the First Amendment. This decision isn’t binding on the Fourth Circuit, which is considering the Redskins mark. Moreover, because the court has struck down part of a federal statute, the Supreme Court will likely agree to consider the case (if the government asks it to); so this isn’t the final word on the matter.
But it’s an important opinion nonetheless. If the court had upheld the bar on registering disparaging marks, and the Fourth Circuit had done the same in the Redskins case, then the Supreme Court likely wouldn’t have considered the case. And the opinions in the case will likely be seriously reviewed by the Justices if the Court does indeed agree to hear the matter.
In summary, a Federal Appellate Court has decreed that portion of Trademark Law which the Trademark Office cited to revoke the NFL team-name "The Redskins" is unconstitutional. So if the Fourth Circuit Court decides to revoke the application of "The Slants", the US Supreme Court will likely step in to clarify the discrepancy.
DonDiego concurs in this most recent support of free speech in the United States.
"Hail to the Redskins."
Ref: The Washington Post
But the Patent and Trademark Office denied the registration of "The Slants" based upon §2(a) of the Federal Trademark Law which excludes the registration of “scandalous, immoral, or disparaging marks.” Among other things, that provision covers marks that a “substantial composite of the referenced group” perceives as disparaging a religion, nation, ethnic group, belief system, and the like.
This is the same Law which the Patent and Trademark Office cited when it recently cancelled the registration of "The Redskins"
This morning, 22 December 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held (in the application of the Law to "The Slants"), by a 9-to-3 vote, that this exclusion of “disparaging” marks violated the First Amendment. This decision isn’t binding on the Fourth Circuit, which is considering the Redskins mark. Moreover, because the court has struck down part of a federal statute, the Supreme Court will likely agree to consider the case (if the government asks it to); so this isn’t the final word on the matter.
But it’s an important opinion nonetheless. If the court had upheld the bar on registering disparaging marks, and the Fourth Circuit had done the same in the Redskins case, then the Supreme Court likely wouldn’t have considered the case. And the opinions in the case will likely be seriously reviewed by the Justices if the Court does indeed agree to hear the matter.
In summary, a Federal Appellate Court has decreed that portion of Trademark Law which the Trademark Office cited to revoke the NFL team-name "The Redskins" is unconstitutional. So if the Fourth Circuit Court decides to revoke the application of "The Slants", the US Supreme Court will likely step in to clarify the discrepancy.
DonDiego concurs in this most recent support of free speech in the United States.
"Hail to the Redskins."
Ref: The Washington Post
