News & Analysis as of

Lanham Act Trademark Registration Supreme Court of the United States

Mayer Brown

Key Court Decisions: Functional and Generic Trademarks

Mayer Brown on

In this episode of The Upper Brand, Richard Assmus, Kristine Young, and Christa Cole delve into key court cases that have shaped trademark law. They explore the intricacies of functional and generic trademarks, with insights...more

Erise IP

What’s Trending in Trademarks: January 2025

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s trademark attorneys review the latest developments at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, in the courts, and across the corporate world to bring you the stories that you should know about: USPTO...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Supreme Court Doesn’t Want to Play the Name Game: Prohibition Against Using a Person’s Name in a Registered Mark Without Consent...

On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court held that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering trademarks utilizing another person's name without consent was constitutional. In Vidal v. Elster 602 U. S. ____ (2024), the Supreme...more

Haug Partners LLP

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Names Clause in Trump Too Small Decision

Haug Partners LLP on

Referred to as the “names clause”, the Lanham Act prohibits registration of a mark that consists of or comprises a name that identifies a particular living individual without written consent.1 This includes full names,...more

Holland & Knight LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Federal Trademark Statute's "Names Clause"

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected a First Amendment challenge to the "names clause" of the Lanham Act on June 13, 2024. See Vidal v. Elster, No. 22-704. The names clause prohibits federally registering a trademark...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Trademarking History: Justices Uphold Names Clause, Clash Over Reasoning

On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Vidal v. Elster, a case that pitted trademark law against the First Amendment’s free speech protections. While the Court unanimously upheld the Patent and...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Lanham Act’s Names Clause

In Vidal v. Elster, a unanimous Supreme Court of the United States reversed the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision, holding that the Lanham Act’s names clause does not violate the First Amendment or...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Lanham Act’s Personal Names Restriction Does Not Violate First Amendment

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

As expected, based on the tenor of the Justices’ questions during oral argument, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against a trademark applicant seeking to register a mark commenting on former President Donald Trump. The...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Supreme Court Upholds Names Clause in Trademark Law, Emphasizing Historical and Traditional Foundations

Troutman Pepper Locke on

In a landmark decision written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court has unanimously upheld the constitutionality of the Lanham Act’s provision that prohibits the registration of trademarks consisting of, or...more

Genova Burns LLC

Unanimous But Fractured: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of “Trump Too Small” Trademark, With Little Guidance for the Future

Genova Burns LLC on

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Vidal v. Ester, 602 U.S. ___ (2024) that the federal prohibition on registering trademarks that identify a living individual without their consent does not violate the First...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

SCOTUS Rules on "Trump Too Small"—Third Recent Ruling on First Amendment Implications for Lanham Act 

The June 13, 2024, U.S. Supreme Court decision in Vidal v. Elster made waves in the trademark community. All of the Court’s decisions are significant, and this matter was of particular interest because the decision marked the...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

From Rubio's Joke to the Supreme Court: The Journey of 'Trump Too Small' in Vidal v. Elster

Does the Lanham Act’s restriction on registration of trademarks that include an individual’s name without the consent of such individual violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, even when the mark expresses...more

Miller Nash LLP

Supreme Court Vindicates Restriction on Registering Trademarks Containing Personal Names

Miller Nash LLP on

Citing the common law right to use one’s own name commercially and to prevent others from doing so, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 13, 2024 upheld the constitutionality of a challenged restriction on trademark registration....more

Pillsbury - Internet & Social Media Law Blog

Supreme Court Weighs Whether Refusing to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL Trademark Violates First Amendment

On November 1, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court engaged in a thought-provoking deliberation concerning the intersection of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and U.S. trademark law, Vidal v. Elster, Supr. Ct. Case No....more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Supreme Court to Examine Free Speech Limits in “TRUMP TOO SMALL” Trademark Case

The intersection of free speech and private business branding is once again in front of the Supreme Court of the United States. On June 5th, the Supreme Court decided to hear Vidal v. Elster, Case 22-704, an appeal from the...more

Clark Hill PLC

U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Abitron Austria GMBH et al. v. Hetronic International, Inc. Underscores the Need for Foreign...

Clark Hill PLC on

On June 29, the United States Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision regarding the foreign reach of the Lanham Act, the federal statute that prohibits trademark infringement. The decision confirms the...more

BakerHostetler

Extraterritorial Reach of the Lanham Act

BakerHostetler on

The Supreme Court recently ruled in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc. that Lanham Act (Act) remedies for trademark infringement do not extend to infringing conduct that takes place outside the United...more

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

Is Trademark Law ‘Too Small' for the First Amendment? - Katten Kattwalk | Issue 25

During the 2016 presidential debate, Senator Marco Rubio taunted Donald Trump for having “small hands.” Now, more than seven years later, progressive activist Steve Elster is continuing his fight to trademark the phrase...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

SCOTUS To Examine Whether First Amendment “Trumps” Lanham Act

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court continues to show interest in trademark issues with its recent grant of certiorari in another case pitting the Lanham Act against the First Amendment....more

Epstein Becker & Green

How Big a Deal Is “Trump Too Small”? – SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

The question of whether a would-be trademark, “TRUMP TOO SMALL,” warrants a First Amendment exception to the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering a living person’s name as a trademark without that person’s permission has...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Parody, trademarks and the courts

Delineating the boundaries between trademark protection and protected speech has been a long-contested legal issue. On one hand, the Lanham Act governs the use of trademarks to protect consumers from a likelihood of confusion...more

Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, LLC

SCOTUS to Rule on Abitron’s Foreign Application of the Lanham Act

Can the Lanham Act apply to the conduct of foreign entities occurring entirely outside the United States and, if so, what is the test? The Supreme Court will soon decide this issue in Abitron v. Hetronic, potentially...more

Clark Hill PLC

Supreme Court Justices Hear Oral Arguments on Geographical Reach of the Lanham Act and the Extent of First Amendment Protection...

Clark Hill PLC on

This week the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two important trademark infringement cases which test the limits of the Lanham Act and the First Amendment, respectively: Abitron Austria GmbH, et al. v. Hetronic...more

Polsinelli

Relax Jack...It’s Only a Joke!

Polsinelli on

Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC. (Docket 22-148) On March 22, 2023, VIP Products LLC told the Supreme Court that its parody Bad Spaniels whiskey-bottle-shaped dog toys do not violate the Lanham Act...more

Bodman

Disparaging, Immoral, and Scandalous Trademarks: Just Because You Can, Doesn’t Mean You Should

Bodman on

At a Glance - Even though the Supreme Court has paved the way for brands to register trademarks that may be considered disparaging, immoral, or scandalous, brand owners are reversing themselves and voluntarily changing....more

222 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 9

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide