The Supreme Court introduced Monday it could hear a trademark case over using an individual’s title with out the person’s permission in a dispute over the phrase “TRUMP TOO SMALL” — a reference to former President Donald Trump.
The case arose when a person sought to trademark the phrase “TRUMP TOO SMALL” for T-shirts and hats in 2018. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office denied the request, citing a federal legislation that doesn’t enable an individual’s title for use with out consent.
The legislation, Section 1052 of Title 15 of the Lanham Act governing logos, doesn’t enable registration of a mark if it “[c]onsists of or comprises a name, portrait, or signature identifying a particular living individual except by his written consent.”
The particular person challenged the federal government’s denial of the trademark below the First Amendment and the U.S. Circuit Court for the Federal Circuit sided with him, ruling that the legislation is content-based and unlawfully restricts speech a couple of authorities official.
The federal authorities appealed to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to listen to the case and arguing there hasn’t been an issue with the legislation for greater than 75 years.
“Section 1052(c) is a condition on a government benefit, not a restriction on speech. And because it is a reasonable, viewpoint-neutral condition, it is consistent with the First Amendment,” the federal government argued in its court docket submitting.
SEE ALSO: GOP candidate Vivek Ramaswamy: ‘America First’ agenda doesn’t ‘belong to Trump’
It took 4 justices to vote in favor of reviewing the dispute, although the names of the justices should not made public.
The particular person, Steve Elster, had requested the court docket to not take up the dispute as a result of it goes to the guts of the First Amendment with political commentary about Mr. Trump.
“The mark criticizes Trump by using a double entendre, invoking a memorable exchange from a Republican presidential primary debate, while also expressing Elster’s view about ‘the smallness of Donald Trump’s overall approach to governing as president of the United States,’” his lawyer wrote in court docket paperwork.
The case is Vidal v. Elster. It will probably be argued throughout the court docket’s 2023 time period, which begins in October.
Content Source: www.washingtontimes.com