Stay tuned next week for more analysis of this week’s Supreme Court trademark and First Amendment opinion in Matal v. Tam (aka The Slants). One ramification may be changes to the way ‘scandalous’ or ‘immoral’ marks are reviewed by the USPTO. Will this lead to a gold rush for dirty trademark? Perhaps. I imagine in the short term, yes there will be an increase in such filings. But in the long terms it will have negligible impact (outside perhaps of the adult video and entertainment industry — prepare yourself for some interesting descriptiveness analysis!) as 99.9 percent of brands want to be clean and wholesome to attract maximum potential market share.
The following applications were filed with the USPTO on the very day (June 19th) that the Matal v. Tam opinion was handed down (click marks for USPTO records):
candies (previously rejected by the TTAB and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit)
- GOOD SHIT – apparel
- COME FUCK ME PUMPS – women’s shoes
- FUCKABLE – underwear
- NIGGER PLEASE – shirts
- GOOD SHIT – Cigarettes; Cigarettes containing tobacco substitutes not for medical purposes; Cigarettes containing tobacco substitutes, not for medical purposes; Tobacco; Tobacco powder, namely, snus; Tobacco substitute; Tobacco substitutes
- DICKSBYMAIL – bakery goods; On-line retail store services featuring gag gifts, novelties, gimmicks, candy, adult toys, clothing, anonymously sent items.; Online retail bakery shops; Retail shops featuring gifts, candies, and novelty items
- FUCK YOURSELF – sex toys
- TOTALLY F*ING BRUTAL – Hats; Pants; Shorts; T-shirts
- NOFUX CLOTHING COMPANY LLC – Pants; Shirts; Shorts; Athletic pants; Athletic shirts; Athletic shorts; Board shorts; Body shirts; Boxer shorts; Dance pants; Denims; Dress pants; Golf shirts; Gym pants; Gym shorts; Snow pants; Snowboard pants; Sports shirts; Sweat pants; Sweat shirts; T-shirts; Track pants
I filed trademark for ‘Chink’ and ‘Nigga’.