It's official. You can get FUCT, US Supremes tell scandalized bureaucrats in rude trademark spat

www.theregister.co.uk | 6/24/2019 | Staff
elio25 (Posted by) Level 3
Click For Photo: https://regmedia.co.uk/2018/07/17/shutterstock_censored.jpg




When Erik Brunetti in 2011 first tried to obtain a trademark for his clothing company FUCT, the US Patent and Trademark Office blocked his application.

The USPTO relied on a portion of the Lanham Act that allows trademarks to be denied if they "[consist of or comprise] immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter."

Brunetti - Decision - Court

So Brunetti challenged the decision in court.

On Monday this week, the US Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision affirmed a December 2017 decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that found the act's trademark limitation violates the US Constitution's First Amendment guarantee of free speech.

Ruling - Matal - V - Tam - USPTO

Pointing at its own 2017 ruling in Matal v. Tam, which said the USPTO could not deny music group The Slants a trademark just because the term might offend some people, the Supreme Court told the agency in so many words to get FUCT on its registry.

"[T]he 'immoral or scandalous' bar is substantially overbroad," the majority opinion, from Justice Elena Kagan, reads. "There are a great many immoral and scandalous ideas in the world (even more than there are swearwords), and the Lanham Act covers them all. It therefore violates...
(Excerpt) Read more at: www.theregister.co.uk
Wake Up To Breaking News!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Welcome to Long Room!

Where The World Finds Its News!