Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

philosslayer

(3,076 posts)
Tue Dec 22, 2015, 04:24 PM Dec 2015

Offensive trademarks ban revoked [View all]

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

The decision on Tuesday by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC, vacates the refusal by the US 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 (deleted).

"We recognise 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."

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/30427592/offensive-trademarks-are-ok-in-us/

Bad, bad, bad decision. This opens the way towards the Washington football team (I refuse to say the name) having their trademark restored.

57 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Offensive trademarks ban revoked [View all] philosslayer Dec 2015 OP
I would like to see the DC football team change its name, but not because of government action onenote Dec 2015 #1
^^^ This ^^^ Xipe Totec Dec 2015 #4
+2 nomorenomore08 Dec 2015 #22
How is trademark protection a first amendment issue? Adrahil Dec 2015 #26
Because the first amendment doesn't allow the government onenote Dec 2015 #34
Then try airing a cigarette commercial on TV jberryhill Dec 2015 #47
Incorrect. Adrahil Dec 2015 #48
Yup. n/t X_Digger Dec 2015 #37
It's not going to happen as long as "politically correct" is part of our lexicon loyalsister Dec 2015 #56
I wonder if i could trademark "pink tacos" Katashi_itto Dec 2015 #2
Someone already did. It's a restaurant chain in the Western U.S. n/t nomorenomore08 Dec 2015 #23
Drat! Thanks Katashi_itto Dec 2015 #41
What's wrong with the name "Washington Potatoes"? KamaAina Dec 2015 #3
Thanks for the amusement!!! As a Cowboys fan, anything about Danny-boys team madinmaryland Dec 2015 #12
Is Snyder the worst team owner/manager in all of pro sports? nomorenomore08 Dec 2015 #24
4-10. hobbit709 Dec 2015 #44
The stupid runs deep in this country. GeorgeGist Dec 2015 #5
Good decision. I love the 1st and hate censorship. Bonx Dec 2015 #6
Failing to grant an exclusive monopoly in words is not "censorship" jberryhill Dec 2015 #8
Government was attempting to restrict ordinary business use of speech former9thward Dec 2015 #13
Not at all jberryhill Dec 2015 #15
Do you think it would be constitutional for the government onenote Dec 2015 #35
Of what mark? jberryhill Dec 2015 #38
I'll restate: would it be constitutional for the government to refuse onenote Dec 2015 #45
You clearly do not understand the issue here jberryhill Dec 2015 #46
Agree, "Wizards of the Coast" tried to trademark "Nazis" Katashi_itto Dec 2015 #42
You are making a libertarian argument. former9thward Dec 2015 #53
Rofl jberryhill Dec 2015 #54
In general, I would agree with you. nomorenomore08 Dec 2015 #25
"The idea of the federal government altering trademark law" jberryhill Dec 2015 #32
Okay, fair enough. I thought it was a matter of singling out the Redskins on purpose, but maybe not. nomorenomore08 Dec 2015 #36
So you would be ok if an NFL team decided to use the name "n*****'s" instead of?? madinmaryland Dec 2015 #14
The team can call itself what it wants jberryhill Dec 2015 #16
So you are ok if a team from whatever league calls itself the "C" word or the "N" word madinmaryland Dec 2015 #18
What makes you think I'm "okay" with such a thing? jberryhill Dec 2015 #19
Sure, why not? And if nobody bothers to associate with the team it folds. Waldorf Dec 2015 #30
I wonder if this affects a certain South Park episode NobodyHere Dec 2015 #7
Ugh. Ugh. Fucking Ugh. Chan790 Dec 2015 #9
I agree that the name is offensive. And the public should keep the pressure on Snyder as much as nomorenomore08 Dec 2015 #27
Trademarks are actually a restriction on speech, not free speech. surrealAmerican Dec 2015 #10
You seem to be one of the few people who gets this point jberryhill Dec 2015 #17
Good. Nye Bevan Dec 2015 #11
Should the FCC be able to decide what is offensive? madinmaryland Dec 2015 #20
No. Nye Bevan Dec 2015 #21
I agree that such a move by the FCC would be absurd. nomorenomore08 Dec 2015 #28
Absolutely not. GGJohn Dec 2015 #29
I applaud this decision! Heeeeers Johnny Dec 2015 #31
The correct decision. First Amendment should prevail LittleBlue Dec 2015 #33
This message was self-deleted by its author Monk06 Dec 2015 #40
This message was self-deleted by its author Monk06 Dec 2015 #39
I despise the name but the decision was correct Lee-Lee Dec 2015 #43
Some of the responses in this thread are amazing to me.... Adrahil Dec 2015 #49
Another Idiocracy documentary bit of prescience whatthehey Dec 2015 #50
Sex Pistols, butthole surfers, dead kennedy's, nashville pussy, the queers... lame54 Dec 2015 #51
We either have free speech or we don't. I'm glad we do. Android3.14 Dec 2015 #52
"Fucking a!"(tm) Rex Dec 2015 #55
THE SLANTS yuiyoshida Dec 2015 #57
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Offensive trademarks ban ...