Skwim
Veteran Member
.
"Shield the children: It’s time to discuss the Supreme Court’s next case.
Iancu v. Brunetti is a trademark dispute in which Los Angeles artist Erik Brunetti
sued the government, saying it violated the First Amendment by refusing to register the trademark for his “subversive” clothing line:
"Shield the children: It’s time to discuss the Supreme Court’s next case.
Iancu v. Brunetti is a trademark dispute in which Los Angeles artist Erik Brunetti
FUCT[/
.
The briefing contains more profanity than a fraternity party, but Brunetti’s lawyer John R. Sommer told the court that he did not intend to turn Monday’s hearing into a swearing contest.
“It is not expected that it will be necessary to refer to vulgar terms during argument,” Sommer wrote. “If it should be necessary, the discussion will be purely clinical, analogous to when medical terms are discussed.”
A free-speech fight over a trademark might sound familiar. Two years ago, when an Asian American band, the Slants, supported by a professional football team, the Washington Redskins, challenged the law against registering “disparaging” trademarks, the court ruled it was unconstitutional.
“Giving offense is a viewpoint,” wrote Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. “We have said time and again that ‘the public expression of ideas may not be prohibited merely because the ideas are themselves offensive to some of their hearers.’ ”
Brunetti is challenging a neighboring provision in the law, which prohibits the registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks."
source
“It is not expected that it will be necessary to refer to vulgar terms during argument,” Sommer wrote. “If it should be necessary, the discussion will be purely clinical, analogous to when medical terms are discussed.”
A free-speech fight over a trademark might sound familiar. Two years ago, when an Asian American band, the Slants, supported by a professional football team, the Washington Redskins, challenged the law against registering “disparaging” trademarks, the court ruled it was unconstitutional.
“Giving offense is a viewpoint,” wrote Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. “We have said time and again that ‘the public expression of ideas may not be prohibited merely because the ideas are themselves offensive to some of their hearers.’ ”
Brunetti is challenging a neighboring provision in the law, which prohibits the registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks."
source
Thoughts?
.
.
Last edited by a moderator:
