Reply To: 43(a) protection of scandalous marks

Forums General discussion 43(a) protection of scandalous marks Reply To: 43(a) protection of scandalous marks

#318
Barton BeebeBarton Beebe
Keymaster

Hmm, fair point. I still think that, for example, if the PTO struck Redskins from the register, no federal court would protect the wordmark under 43(a), perhaps via its general power under Section 37, and in the tradition of public morals. But on reflection, I think you’re right that the casebook states this too definitely. The government imprimatur thing is a fair objection, but I wonder if 43(a) would be perceived to operate similarly. I will convert this issue in the book into more of an open question.