The Supreme Court has handed down its long-awaited ruling in Matal v Tam, holding that the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. In a unanimous 8-0 opinion, the court states that “the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express ‘the thought that we hate’”. In response, the USPTO has confirmed to World Trademark Review that it plans to "issue further guidance" on how it will affect the examination of applications.

This part of the website has now moved to the subscriber area. To read more, please pick an option below.

Register to access two articles per month

Subscribe for unlimited access to articles, in-depth analysis and research from the World Trademark Review experts

Already registered? Log in

What our customers are saying

World Trademark Review is simply the first resource I will go to for trademark-related information, whether about the latest trademark law development or case news, top trademark practitioners or interesting trademark events.

Jerry F Xia
Deputy general counsel and chief IP counsel – Asia-Pacific, corporate law department
Honeywell

Benefits

Subscribe to World Trademark Review to receive access to the full range of trademark intelligence, insight, and case law, as well as our guides, rankings and daily market insight delivered to your inbox.

Why subscribe?

Comments

Please log in or register to leave a comment.

There are no comments on this article

Share this article