F-word wins in Supreme Court free speech case on trademark protection for 'immoral, scandalous' mate
Source: USA Today
F-word wins in Supreme Court free speech case on trademark protection for 'immoral, scandalous' material
Richard Wolf, USA TODAY Published 10:19 a.m. ET June 24, 2019
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court defended free speech Monday, even for four-letter words. ... Faced with a clothing line called FUCT, the justices struck down federal prohibitions against granting trademark protection for "immoral" or "scandalous" material.
The vote was 6-3 in an opinion written by Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.
The case was brought by Erik Brunetti, founder of the 30-year-old streetwear clothing line, who previously met a blockade at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. A federal appeals court overturned that decision, prompting the government's Supreme Court petition.
The government already could not stop Brunetti from selling his wares, which the Justice Department pointedly noted are available even in children's and infants' sizes. The issue was whether he deserved to register his trademark a federal benefit that makes it harder for competitors to challenge.
Read more: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/24/fuct-supreme-court-trademark-misspelled-f-word/1367858001/
News link coming. I'm going for the 1A stuff.
Here's the original link:
#SCOTUS rules that federal ban on registration of "immoral" or "scandalous" trademarks violates the First Amendment, in challenge brought by designer who wanted to register the trademark for his FUCT clothing brand
Link to tweet
-- -- -- --
This was supposed to be the last day of the #scotus term. But with 12 cases still to decide and more work to be done: OVERTIME!
Link to tweet
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(56,897 posts)Last edited Mon Jun 24, 2019, 11:15 AM - Edit history (2)
[edited a half-hour later]
And here we go. Hat tip, http://live.scotusblog.com/Event/Live_blog_of_orders_and_opinions__June_24_2019
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-302_e29g.pdf
csziggy
(34,120 posts)Spelling counts. FUCT is not spelled the same as "fuck" so it is not the same word. Elementary school kids can have fun with the sound of the brand name, but it still is not the "f-word."
If changing a letter didn't count my eyes would have tear ducks!
groundloop
(11,488 posts)csziggy
(34,120 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)What would be next? SHIP, ASK, PUCK?
muriel_volestrangler
(101,154 posts)csziggy
(34,120 posts)To me, a swear word or blasphemy is one that involves a deity. "Fuck" does not. Yes, it is a rude word, but these days, rude is not considered to be a problem for many, including the current asshat sitting in the Oval Office.
I defer to George Carlin:
muriel_volestrangler
(101,154 posts)'FUCT' is a better pun than 'ducks'. And for some reason you blame "the news guys", when the case was about a Patent and Trademark Office ruling.
csziggy
(34,120 posts)It was funny watching Pete Williams deal with it - spelling it out and promising that that would be the only time he ever even did that.
I was laughing at the coverage - not making a comment on the court decision.
The Mouth
(3,123 posts)and any who would impose it, anywhere, for any reason, are at least as evil as any MAGA assholes.
If you don't support free speech you find offensive, dangerous, shocking, and abhorrent, then you don't support free speech period.