Supreme Court Rules ‘Trump Too Small’ Trademark Violates Lanham Act

Muzamil Huq spoke to World IP Review about the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that blocking the phrase ‘Trump Too Small’ as a trademark did not violate free speech, concluding that the Lanham Act’s so-called ‘names clause’ was compatible with the First Amendment.

Muzamil noted that the viewpoint-neutral aspect of the Lanham Act “ultimately doomed” the plaintiff, stating, “The perceived stifling of [the plaintiff’s] speech is outweighed by the reasonableness of the government’s need for a trademark registration system that functions equally for all. Though all the justices came to this same conclusion, the path by which they did so greatly varied—the majority led by Thomas anchoring their reasoning on the history and tradition surrounding trademark protection for individuals’ names while (Amy) Barrett’s and (Sonia) Sotomayor’s concurrences were more rooted in precedent.”

Read the full article.