Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM Supreme Court Upholds Names Clause in Trademark Law, Emphasizing Historical and Traditional Foundations
In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously upheld the constitutionality of the Lanham Act's provision that prohibits the registration of trademarks consisting of or comprising the name of a particular living individual without the individual's written consent.
August 28, 2024 at 02:43 PM
5 minute read
What You Need to Know
- The case centered on an attempt to register the trademark "Trump too small," accompanied by an illustration of a hand gesture, for use on shirts and hats.
- The Court determined that the names clause is not a viewpoint-based regulation, as it prohibits all marks that use another person's name without consent, regardless of the use.
- The ruling reaffirms the constitutionality of the Lanham Act's names clause, emphasizing the importance of content-based distinctions in trademark law to protect the reputation and goodwill of individuals.
In a landmark decision, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously upheld the constitutionality of the Lanham Act's provision that prohibits the registration of trademarks consisting of or comprising the name of a particular living individual without the individual's written consent. 15 U.S.C. §1052(c) (authorizing refusal of a trademark application if it "[c]onsists of or comprises a name. portrait, or signature identifying a particular living individual except by his written consent …."
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
8 minute read
'Entitlement to Information Has Its Limits:' Judge Denies Another Discovery Deadline Extension in Trademark Suit
4 minute read
'Unfair Competition'?: Akerman Files Trademark Infringement Lawsuit Against Maryland Nonprofit
2 minute read
Ex Parte Trademark Appeals to District Court — Lessons Learned from the Front Lines
13 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Connecticut Movers: Year-End Promotions, Hires and an Office Opening
- 2Luigi Mangione Defense Attorney Says NYC Mayor’s Comments on Case Raise Fair Trial Concerns
- 3Revisiting the Boundaries Between Proper and Improper Argument: 10 Years Later
- 4Hochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
- 5Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
