![\"\"](\"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/230603-trump-too-small-mjf-1702-a8ebec.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Published: September 13, 2023<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n New York\u2014September 13, 2023\u2014<\/strong>The International Trademark Association (INTA) has filed an\u00a0amicus brief<\/a>\u00a0with the United States Supreme Court in\u00a0Vidal v. Elster<\/em>, No. 22-704, a case considering whether the refusal to register a trademark under\u00a015 U.S.C. \u00a7 1052(c) violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment when the mark contains criticism of a government official or public figure. Section 1052(c) of the Lanham Act requires consent to name a living individual in a registered trademark\u2014in this case then-President Donald Trump.<\/span><\/p>\n In this case, respondent Steve Elster sought to register the mark TRUMP TOO SMALL based on an intent to use the mark on t-shirts. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) refused registration of the mark under Section 1052(c). Mr. Elster appealed the USPTO\u2019s refusal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, which affirmed the refusal to register, recognizing that the purpose of Section 1052(c) is to align trademark law with the right of publicity a person has in their name. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the refusal, holding that the application of Section 1052(c) to bar registration of the mark \u201cunconstitutionally restricts free speech in violation of the First Amendment.\u201d The government sought review by the U.S. Supreme Court.<\/span><\/p>\n The case is significant because it addresses whether a \u201cLanham Act bar\u201d on the registration of a trademark is an impermissible restriction on speech. The Supreme Court has recently considered other Lanham Act bars on registration in\u00a0Matal v. Tam<\/em>, 582 U.S. 218\u00a0 (2017) and\u00a0Iancu v. Brunetti<\/em>, 139 S. Ct. 2294 (2019), but in both of those cases, the statutory provision was viewpoint based. Unlike the statutory bars in\u00a0Tam<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0Brunetti<\/em>, the statutory bar in Section 1052(c) is viewpoint neutral, thus this case addresses a question left unresolved by the Court\u2019s prior decisions.<\/span><\/p>\n INTA filed a brief in support of USPTO arguing that Section 1052(c) should survive the constitutional challenge for four principal reasons: 1) the statute does not create any significant or undue restriction on speech because a trademark owner does not need a registration to engage in speech; 2)\u00a0the provision is viewpoint neutral and therefore distinguishable from the provisions struck down in the Supreme Court\u2019s recent\u00a0Tam<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0Brunetti<\/em>\u00a0cases; 3)\u00a0Congress has a substantial interest in regulating registration of trademarks that appropriate and trade upon the names and associated publicity rights of recognized individuals; and 4) refusals under Section 1052(c) permit more speech, not less, because they deny the owner the presumptive right to exclude third parties from using the claimed mark.<\/span><\/p>\n About the International Trademark Association New York\u2014September 13, 2023 (INTA) has filed an\u00a0amicus brief\u00a0with the U.S Supreme Court in\u00a0Vidal v. Elster.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":9066,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1563,1594],"tags":[589,655,1843,4317,4319,4321,4323,4325,4327,4329,4331,4333],"class_list":["post-9072","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-enforcement","category-trademark","tag-inta-en","tag-trademark","tag-trademark-law","tag-trademark-dispute","tag-steve-elster","tag-usa","tag-the-u-s","tag-united-state","tag-u-s-spreme-court","tag-donald-trump-en","tag-uspto-en","tag-lanham-act-en","cat-1563-id","cat-1594-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9072"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9072"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9072\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9108,"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9072\/revisions\/9108"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9066"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9072"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9072"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9072"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/ELITE-on-google-news-1.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/shutterstock_1950024118_yuriy_k.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/lawfirmelite.com\/vi\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/inta_logo.png\"){kind=logo}
<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>The International Trademark Association (INTA) is a global association of brand owners and professionals dedicated to supporting trademarks and complementary intellectual property (IP) to foster consumer trust, economic growth, and innovation, and committed to building a better society through brands. Members include nearly 6,000 organizations, representing more than 33,500 individuals (trademark owners, professionals, and academics) from 181 countries, who benefit from the Association\u2019s global trademark resources, policy development, education and training, and international network. Founded in 1878, INTA is headquartered in New York City, with offices in Beijing, Brussels, Nairobi, Santiago, Singapore, and the Washington, D.C., Metro Area, and representatives in Amman, Nairobi, and New Delhi. For more information, visit\u00a0inta.org.<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"