I've already seen arguments for this but against that. My response to those are simple: The First Amendment assures that you CAN have it both ways! And the Supreme Court rightly for a change ruled as such for liberty's sake.NBCNews:The federal government cannot refuse to grant protection to trademarks that some consider offensive, the U.S. Supreme court ruled Monday.
The decision is a victory for members of an Asian-American rock band who call themselves “The Slants.” Organizer Simon Tam said the name is intended “to take on stereotypes that people have about us, like the slanted eyes, and own them.”
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office refused in 2011 to grant the name government protection, citing a federal law that forbids issuing trademarks that may disparage people “or bring them into contempt or disrepute.”
But in a unanimous vote, the Supreme Court said that law violates free expression.
The ruling is also a boost for the Washington Redskins of the NFL, because it will undoubtedly require the government to restore the trademark protection taken away from the team in 2014 after a finding that it was offensive to Native Americans.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears trademark cases, ruled that making decisions about which trademarks might be disparaging amounts to improper viewpoint discrimination by the government, “in order to stifle the use of certain disfavored messages.”
The Supreme Court decision upheld that ruling.
Related links: Boost to Redskins case: Supreme Court says government can’t refuse disparaging trademarks
Obama gets slapped down by the courts AGAIN, means Redskins must get trademark protection back
Ted Cruz wallops anti-speech college crybullies
UPDATE: And there it is!
