Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Submission Preview

Link to Story

U.S. Supreme Court Considers Issue of Trademark Protection for Profanity

Accepted submission by takyon at 2019-04-16 15:11:55
Business

Supreme Court Dances Around The F-Word With Real Potential Financial Consequences [npr.org]

Dirty words make it to the U.S. Supreme Court only occasionally. One of those occasions came Monday, in a case involving a clothing line named "FUCT." The issue is whether the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office acted unconstitutionally when it refused to grant trademark protection to the brand name. And, for the justices, the immediate problem was how to discuss the the F-word without actually saying it.

The "FUCT" clothing line, created by designer Eric Brunetti, is mainly hoodies, loose pants, shorts and T-shirts, all with the brand name prominently displayed.

[...] Brunetti's case got a boost two years ago when the Supreme Court ruled that an Asian-American band calling itself "The Slants" could not be denied [npr.org] trademark protection. The trademark office had turned the band down, because it deemed the name racially "disparaging," but the court said the denial amounted to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.

Dealing with the brand name "FUCT" proved a bit more daunting in the Supreme Court chamber Monday. Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart referred to the brand name as a "profane past participle form of a well-known word of profanity and perhaps the paradigmatic word of profanity in our language."

Also at Reuters [reuters.com].

Previously: Two Unanimous SCOTUS Victories for Free Speech [soylentnews.org]


Original Submission