'Trump too small'

 

 Supreme Court says jab at Trump can't be trademarked

The man behind the case wanted to sell T-shirts with the phrase he said conveys the idea that Trump and his policies 'are diminutive.' It brought some levity to the dry world of Trademark law.



WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously rejected an attempt to trademark the lewd phrase “Trump too small,” a decision that recognized the government’s long history of setting boundaries on trademarks.

But a federal appeals court backed the applicant, California attorney Steve Elster, holding that the law would restrict his freedom of speech and criticism of a public official.

Elster wanted to sell T-shirts with the phrase he said conveys the idea that former President Donald Trump’s “features” and his policies “are diminutive.”

Without getting into the suggestive meaning of the description during their October oral arguments, the justices observed that there have long been restrictions on trademarks.

Roy Gutterman, director of the Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University, said the case offered some levity into the dry world of trademark law and rollicking political discourse.

When the case began, Gutterman bought a "Trump Too Small" T-shirt and hung it in his office.

“I suppose under today's decision," he said, "I could now go ahead and make my own without violating Mr. Elster's intellectual property rights."











Comments

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices