Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Law & Social Bounds

Articles

No. 2 (45) (2023)

Freedom of Speech and the Registration Barrier for Scandalous, Immoral, and Derogatory Trademarks in the US Legal Order

DOI
https://doi.org/10.36128/PRIW.VI45.255
Submitted
February 12, 2021
Published
2023-07-10

Abstract

The author presents the relationship between the freedom of speech of the First Amendment and the Art. 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a) Lanham Act. The analysis is mainly based on the views of the doctrine and landmark decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding this matter. All these allow us to assess and determine the consequences of the optics imposed by the Supreme Court.

References

  1. Abdel-Khalik Jasmine, „To Live in In-»Fame«-Y: Reconceiving Scandalous Marks as Analogous to Famous Marks” Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 25 (2007): 174-236.
  2. Baird R. Stephen, „Moral Intervention in the Trademark Arena: Banning theRegistration of Scandalous and Immoral Trademarks” Trademark Reporter, 83 (1993): 661-800.
  3. Blankenship G. Justin, „The Cancellation of Redskins as a Disparaging Trademark: Is Federal Trademark Law an Appropriate Solution for Words that Offend” University of Colorado Law Review, nr 2 (2001): 415-458.
  4. Bolen Christopher, Richard J. Caira, Jason S. Wood, „When Scandal Becomes Vogue: the Registrability of Sexual References in Trademark and Protection of Trademarks from Tarnishment in Sexual Contexts” The Journal of Law and Technology, 39 (1998-1999): 435-471.
  5. Carpenter M. Megan, Mary Garner, „NsFw: An Empirical Study of Scandalous Trademarks” Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, nr 2 (2015): 321-365.
  6. Carpenter M. Megan, Kathryn T. Murphy, „Calling Bulls**t on the Lanham Act: The 2(a) Bar for Immoral, Scandalous, and Disparaging Marks” University of Louisville Law Review, 49 (2011): 465-483.
  7. Davis H. Theodore, „Registration of Scandalous, Immoral, and Disparaging Matter Under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act: Can One Man’s Vulgarity Be Another’s Registered Trademark?” Ohio State Law Journal, 54 (1993): 332-401.
  8. Dzidziuszko-Rościszewska Anna, „Obsceniczność w świetle I Poprawki do Konstytucji usa” Politeja, nr 13 (2010): 229-240.
  9. Farber A. Daniel, „Commercial Speech and First Amendment Theory”, Northwestern University Law Review, nr 3 (1979): 372-408.
  10. Gilson LaLonde Anne, Jerome Gilson, „Trademarks Laid Bare: Marks That May Be Scandalous and Immoral” The Trademark Reporter, nr 5 (2011): 1476-1545.
  11. Kozinski Alex, Stuart Banner, „Who’s Afraid of Commercial Speech?” Virginia Law Review, nr 4 (1990): 627-653.
  12. https://doi.org/10.2307/1073208.
  13. Lefstin Jeffrey, „Does the First Amendment Bar Cancellation of redskiNs” Stanford Law Review, nr 3 (2000): 665-708.
  14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229475.
  15. O’Sullivan Sophia, „Scandalous Trademarks in Australia and The United States: Constitutional Validity, Uncertainty and Inconsistency” Perth International Law Journal, 3 (2018): 10-18.
  16. Pace A. Kimberly, „The Washington Redskins Case and the Doctrine of Disparagement: How Politically Correct Must a Trademark Be?” Pepperdine Law Rewiev, nr 1 (1994): 7-57.
  17. Reiter B. Jendi, „Redskins and Scarlet Letters: Why Immoral and Scandalous Trademarks Should Be Federally Registrable” Federal Circuit Bar Journal, nr 3 (1976): 191-210.
  18. Shiffrin Steven, „Government Speech” UCLA Law Review, nr 3 (1980): 566-653.
  19. Skrzydło Jacek, Wolność słowa w orzecznictwie Sądu Najwyższego Stanów Zjednoczonych i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka. Analiza porównawcza. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek, 2013.
  20. Snoddon M. Emily, „Clarifying Vagueness: Rethinking the Supreme Court’s Vagueness Doctrine” University of Chicago Law Review, nr 8 (2019): 2302-2353.
  21. Snow Ned, „Denying Trademark for Scandalous Speech” UC Davis Law Review, 51 (2018): 2331-2369.
  22. Tokarczyk Roman, Prawo amerykańskie. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer, 2007.
  23. Tushnet Rebecca, „The First Amendment Walks into a Bar: Trademark Registration and Free Speech” Notre Dame Law Review, nr 1 (2016): 381-426.
  24. Wallace R. John, „Discriminatory & Disparaging Team Names, Logos & Mascots: Race Workable Challenges & the Misapplication of the Doctrine of Laches” Rutgers & the Law Review, nr 1 (2011): 203-242.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.