Last week saw the second trademark case of 2015 to make significant news. In March, the Supreme Court decided B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1293 (2015) holding that proceedings at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) of the USPTO have a preclusive effect in later District Court actions when the proper conditions are met. Now the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) has held that the bar on registering disparaging marks in Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act is unconstitutional, violating the first amendment protections for private speech. The full opinion in In re Simon Shiao Tam is here.
Here is a roundup of stories and blog posts from others around the web with links:
- The TTABlog®: CAFC Deems Section 2(a) Disparagement Provision Unconstitutional
- Technology & Marketing Law Blog: Are Legal Restrictions On Disparaging Personal Names Unconstitutional?–In re The Slants (Guest Blog Post)
- Seattle Copyright Watch: Lanham Act Disparagement Provision Held Unconstitutional
- PatentlyO: Free Speech: Prohibition on Registering Disparaging Marks is Unconstitutional, Federal Circuit Rules
- The Legal Satyricon: Spics Not Welcome
- Lexology: Federal Circuit Takes a New Slant on Disparaging Trademarks
- Law360: Offensive TM Rule Is Unconstitutional, Fed. Circ. Rules
- IPWatchdog®: Unconstitutional – CAFC Rules PTO Cannot Deny Registration for Disparaging Trademarks
- Rebecca Tushnet’s 43(B)log: one note on In re Tam: TM as right to suppress others’ speech
- Federal Circuit IP Blog: EN BANC FEDERAL CIRCUIT RULES BAN ON “DISPARAGING” TRADEMARKS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
- INCONTESTABLE®: FEDERAL CIRCUIT RULES BAN ON “DISPARAGING” TRADEMARKS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
- THR, ESQ.: Rock Band Wins First Amendment Appeal Over “Disparaging” Trademarks
