SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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."
(Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Sunday October 02 2016, @08:10PM
thank you, but no thank you: i was CLEARLY referring to trademarks in particular in my remarks, BUT ALSO lumped them in with the other SO-CALLED 'IP/Intellectual Property' in an editorial comment in that they are ALL out of control and used for the purposes of the korporatocracy, NOT to protect us 99%...
i am very well aware of the differences (in point of fact, you should very well ask that of the respective gummint departments which have obviously and egregiously gone far beyond their charge, and have perverted the system to benefit the korporatocracy), but the overarching point is they are all similarly abused by those who have loads of hungry lawyers on staff, NOT to protect little suzy etsy...