Our Website Uses Cookies 


We and the third parties that provide content, functionality, or business services on our website may use cookies to collect information about your browsing activities in order to provide you with more relevant content and promotional materials, on and off the website, and help us understand your interests and improve the website.


For more information, please contact us or consult our Privacy Notice.

Your binder contains too many pages, the maximum is 40.

We are unable to add this page to your binder, please try again later.

This page has been added to your binder.

Iancu v Brunetti - ruling trademark community has its say on implications of momentous US Supreme Court decision

June 25, 2019, https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/enforcement-and-litigation/iancu-v-brunetti-ruling-trademark-community-has-its-say-implications

Simon Frankel is quoted in World Trade Review regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in Iancu v Brunetti, holding that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on the registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks violates the First Amendment. Mr. Frankel says, “registration of ‘disparaging’ trademarks – today's decision is not very surprising. The Court extended its prior decision to find unconstitutional a prohibition on registration of trademarks that are ‘immoral’ or ‘scandalous,’ as also an impermissible viewpoint-based violation of the First Amendment. It is important to remember that this decision only means that trademarks such as the one at issue - for FUCT in connection with clothing - can receive a federal trademark registration. Even without this decision, such marks can be used to identify the source of goods or services and can be enforced as unregistered marks under the Lanham Act.”

Share this article: