Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Saturday October 01 2016, @12:34PM   Printer-friendly
from the who-defines-offensive dept.

The Supreme Court on Thursday said it would decide, once and for all, whether federal intellectual property regulators can refuse to issue trademarks with disparaging or inappropriate names.

At the center of the issue is a section of trademark law that actually forbids the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) from approving a trademark if it "consists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter; or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute."

The case before the justices, which they will hear sometime in the upcoming term beginning in October, concerns the Portland-based Asian-American rock band called the Slants. Previously, decisions have come down on both sides regarding trademarking offensive names. The most notable denial is likely the name of the NFL's Washington franchise, "Redskins." But lesser known denials include "Stop the Islamization of America," "The Christian Prostitute," "AMISHHOMO," "Mormon Whiskey," "Ride Hard Retard," "Abort the Republicans," and "Democrats Shouldn't Breed."

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/can-you-trademark-an-offensive-name-or-not-us-supreme-court-to-decide/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 01 2016, @03:20PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 01 2016, @03:20PM (#408797)

    Is your grandma hot? Send her to San Diego so she can hook up with EF.

  • (Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Saturday October 01 2016, @03:40PM

    by Knowledge Troll (5948) on Saturday October 01 2016, @03:40PM (#408802) Homepage Journal

    Send her to San Diego so she can hook up with EF.

    Oh he lives in San Diego? His fucked opinion makes even more sense now:

    1) The further south you go generally the more conservative it gets. This applies inside the states on the West Coast of the USA and the West Coast as a whole.
    2) It'd be easy to believe there is an invasion of non-white people in Southern California. Just open eyes and be half paranoid.
    3) He gets to look at street signs that show a father and mother dragging their children and running so fast the kids legs are being drug on the ground while they are crossing the border illegally. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_sign#/media/File:W54_Special_%28CA-San_Ysidro%29_-vector.svg [wikipedia.org]

    Sorry guys it is looking more and more like he actually believes this stuff and isn't trolling you; especially if he is drunk all the time. Why does that matter? Fighting him probably just adds another badge of honor. Loving/feeling sorry for him while avoiding arguing the situation is most likely going to result in his becoming uncomfortable with the thread. Community wide this approach probably drives him elsewhere.

    Or I've turned into some kind of pussyfag.

    Is your grandma hot?

    I was going to link to grandma porn but fuck I can't bring myself to do it. I guess pussyfag it is.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 02 2016, @01:40AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 02 2016, @01:40AM (#408938)

      The further south you go generally the more conservative it gets. This applies inside the states on the West Coast of the USA and the West Coast as a whole.

      ...and some, I assume, are good people.