| 
             
						Rock band The Slants 
						cannot trademark disparaging name: appeals court 
			
   
            
			Send a link to a friend  
 
            
						
						[April 21, 2015] By 
						Andrew Chung 
			
						NEW YORK (Reuters) - 
						Asian-American rock band the Slants, which says it chose 
						its name as a way to reclaim a term usually considered a 
						racial slur, cannot trademark the name because it is 
						disparaging, a U.S. appeals court ruled on Monday. 
             | 
        	
			
            | 
				 The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal 
				Circuit rejected the band's argument that the government's 
				refusal to grant a trademark violated its free speech rights. 
				 
				The ruling could have implications for the high-profile fight 
				over whether the National Football League's Washington Redskins 
				should lose its trademarks. 
				 
				The Portland, Oregon-based band, which plays a kind of grunge 
				music it calls Chinatown Dance Rock, applied for trademarks in 
				2010 and 2011, and was rejected both times on the grounds the 
				name disparaged Asians. 
				 
				The band appealed. Its lawyer, Ronald Coleman, argued that the 
				name was a healthy reappropriation of a term usually considered 
				a slur, much like the lesbian motorcycle club Dykes on Bikes, 
				which did get a trademark. 
				 
				The band argued that in acting as a "referee of political 
				correctness," the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office violated the 
				First Amendment. 
				 
				The three-judge panel of the Federal Circuit said there was 
				evidence the term is offensive to people of Asian descent. It 
				said that there was no free speech violation since a refusal to 
				federally register a trademark does not prevent the applicant 
				from still using it. 
  
			
			[to top of second column]  | 
            
             
            
				 
			Despite upholding the rejection of the Slants trademark, U.S. 
			Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore said in a separate, non-binding opinion 
			that it might be time to revisit the federal trademark law's 
			disparagement provisions, which she said probably would not hold up 
			under current free speech laws. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that 
			even though some speech may be offensive, that "does not justify its 
			suppression," she said. 
			The case has parallels to the Washington Redskins' lawsuit against 
			five Native Americans who successfully convinced the PTO in June to 
			cancel the NFL team's trademarks because that name disparages Native 
			Americans. The team is appealing the cancellation, saying the 
			disparagement provision violates the First Amendment. 
			 
			Coleman called Monday's opinion "unnecessarily politicized" and said 
			the band would likely seek review of the decision by the full 
			Federal Circuit court. The USPTO declined to comment. 
			 
			The case is In Re Simon Shiao Tam, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
			Federal Circuit, No 14-1203. 
			 
			(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Ted 
			Botha) 
			[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.] Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.  |