Blog
Does the Bar on Registration of Disparaging Marks Violate the First Amendment?
Fish & Richardson
Authors
- Name
- Kristen McCallion
- Person title
- Principal
The Slants are an all-Asian American rock band founded by Simon Young (a/k/a Simon Tam) in 2006. All members of the current lineup are of Asian descent and they are well known for their involvement with the Asian American community, and fighting racism and stereotypes.
The Slants were denied a federal trademark registration for THE SLANTS by the USPTO, which determined that the mark was disparaging and thus unregistrable under Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1052(a), which bars the registration of a designation that consists of or comprises matter which, with regard to persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, does any of the following: (1) disparages them, (2) falsely suggests a connection with them, (3) brings them into contempt, or (4) brings them into disrepute. The TTAB affirmed the denial of registration and, just last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed the same, holding that the mark is disparaging, and that Section 2(a) is constitutional. In addition to arguing that the TTAB had erred in denying registration, Mr. Tam had challenged the constitutionality of § 2(a) to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
In an interesting turn of events, Judge Kimberly Ann Moore, who wrote for the Court, also filed "additional views." Judge Moore criticized a 1981 decision by the U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals that had found the Lanham Act's disparagement provision constitutional. In re McGinley, 660 F.2d 481 (CCPA 1981). Judge Moore raised several interesting points as to why the reasoning underlying the decision in McGinley is outdated, and how Section 2(a) abridges protected speech, explaining that it is "unquestionably true that trademarks are protected speech under Supreme Court commercial speech jurisprudence." Judge Moore also made a sua sponte request for a poll on whether to consider this case en banc.
Just yesterday, the Court vacated the panel's decision, reinstated the appeal, and ordered the case to be heard en banc to answer the following question: "Does the bar on registration of disparaging marks in 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a) violate the First Amendment?"
Additional media coverage: The Slants Get Hearing on Rude Trademark Issue Facing Redskins
The opinions expressed are those of the authors on the date noted above and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fish & Richardson P.C., any other of its lawyers, its clients, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This post is for general information purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed.
More by same author(s)
Blog March 28, 2023
U.S. Copyright Office Cancels Registration for AI-Generated Art, Issues AI-Related Registration Guidance
Article March 16, 2023
Could AI Require Platforms to Do More to Prevent Infringement?
Blog January 19, 2021
Trademark, Copyright Legislation Passed as Part of COVID-19 Relief Bill
Blog July 6, 2020
Supreme Court Finds BOOKING.COM Protectable; Rejects "Sweeping Rule" Denying Protection to "generic.com" Marks
Blog June 27, 2019
First Amendment: 3, Lanham Act: 0 - SCOTUS Holds Lanham Act Prohibition on Immoral and Scandalous Marks is Unconstitutional Restriction on Free Speech
Blog January 30, 2019
2018 Trademark and Copyright Year in Review
Blog January 28, 2019
USPTO Announces Expedited Cancellation Pilot Program
Blog July 2, 2018
Supreme Court to Resolve Copyright Registration Circuit Split
Blog December 6, 2017
Ensure Your Safe Harbor Protection — (Re)Designate Your DMCA Agent This Month
Related thought leadership
Blog June 26, 2025
Lack of Bona Fide Intent to Use Sends Alcohol Trademark Application Down the Drain
Blog June 18, 2025
Green Glove Trademark Application Gets Red Light From Federal Circuit
Blog May 15, 2025
No Space at the Trademark Office for US SPACE FORCE
Blog May 1, 2025
More Is More: Ensure Your Mark Is Protectable Before You Enforce
Blog April 24, 2025
Federal Circuit Finds Beer Trademark Application Nothing but "Chicken Scratch"
Blog April 2, 2025
TTAB Puts Pool Hall Behind the Eight Ball
Blog April 1, 2025
Trademark Owners May Play Only Zone Defense at the TTAB
Blog January 31, 2025
USPTO Kicks “Hijacker” of Foreign Trademark Out the Door
Article March 15, 2024
AI Copyright Issues Take Centre Stage in George Carlin Podcast Dispute
Blog September 22, 2023
TTAB Rules Consumer Perception Remains the Critical Inquiry for Generic.gTLD Marks