Pat Concannon Weighs In on Supreme Court Ruling on Offensive Trademarks in Law360Print PDF
Patrick J. Concannon, a partner in Nutter's Intellectual Property Department, commented on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Matal v. Tam, which ruled that the U.S. government’s ban on offensive trademark registrations violates the First Amendment in Law360. In the article, “Lawyers Weigh In On High Court's Offensive-TM Ruling,” Pat points out why the decision is significant.
“The In re Tam Supreme Court decision could have implications beyond the Lanham Act disparaging mark prohibition provision that was struck down today. Will this result embolden others to similarly challenge Section 2a registration prohibitions on 'scandalous' and 'immoral' marks? Or what about the prohibition on registration of marks that bring beliefs into disrepute? I predict that it will. Today’s ruling was specific to disparaging marks, but these other Section 2a bases for prohibiting registration of ‘offensive viewpoint’ marks now seem ripe for challenge,” Pat said.