'Trump Too Small' T-shirt slogan turns into US Supreme Court battle

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Reuters

October 27, 2023 6:10 AM EDT


WASHINGTON, Oct 27 (Reuters) - "Trump Too Small" - a phrase mocking former President Donald Trump that a California lawyer intended to slap on T-shirts - instead has become the center of another U.S. Supreme Court battle exploring the intersection of trademark law and free speech rights. The justices are set to hear arguments on Wednesday in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's appeal of a lower court's decision that reversed the agency's denial of attorney Steve Elster's 2018 trademark application for "Trump Too Small."

At issue is whether the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment free speech protections for criticism of public figures outweigh the agency's concerns over Trump's rights, as the lower court found. The agency will try to convince the justices to uphold a 1946 federal law that bars trademarks featuring a person's name without consent. President Joe Biden's administration is seeking to protect Trump - the man he defeated in the 2020 U.S. election - from, in its view, having his name misappropriated in commerce. Trump is not personally involved in the case.

Elster has argued that a ruling favoring the government would give politicians improper control over speech about them. The agency, on the other hand, has said that trademarks like Elster's could restrict the free speech of others on political matters by giving legal ownership of certain words to specific people. Trademarks protect identifiers of sources of goods, like brand names, logos and advertising slogans.

The Supreme Court in recent years has struck down two trademark laws based on free speech concerns. It ruled in favor of Asian-American rock band The Slants in 2017 against a ban on trademarks that "disparage," and in favor of artist Erik Brunetti against a prohibition on "immoral" or "scandalous" marks in a dispute over his "FUCT" brand in 2019.

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-too-small-t-shirt-slogan-turns-into-us-supreme-court-battle-2023-10-27/

[hueymahl]

1. Should not be able to trademark political speech

Trademark office should win this one and the denial be upheld. Trademarks restrict free use which, by definition, restrict free speech.

[William Seger]

5. I agree, but he should be able to sell the shirts, anyway

... just no trademark, so anyone can sell them.

[hueymahl]

11. 100%

[CrispyQ]

2. FUCT - I love it. Hadn't heard of that brand before.

Interesting arguments.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. Trademarks are usually associated with a specific product, use, design I think

If a trademark is granted, candidates would be wise to grab real estate much like the early internet days to prevent the use of their name(s) in disparaging ways.

[Deep State Witch]

4. So, If This Guy Loses

Will the MAGAts be forced no to sell those "F*ck Biden" flags?

[Wonder Why]

6. No. He is not being denied the right to produce them, only the right to EXCLUSIVELY do so.

And I think that is the way it should be.

[William Seger]

7. No, they just can't get a trademark

This is not "free speech" restriction; trademarks just protect you from someone selling a product using your brand name. All rights have limits, typically where they bump up against someone else's rights -- a fact that gun nuts choose to ignore.

[OKIsItJustMe]

14. Sadly, no

Their manufacturers may be barred from trademarking them however.

[SouthernDem4ever]

8. If Drump would just show everyone that he's "not small"

Then the shirts would be worthless. Right?

[ExWhoDoesntCare]

15. OMG

Why would you evoke that image?

I'm trying to have lunch here.

[ShazzieB]

16. Seriously.

The only thing grosser than Trump is any part of Trump unclothed.

Especially that part.

[keithbvadu2]

19. Ask the guy Trump calls 'Little' Marco Rubio.

Little Marco set himself up as the expert on Trump's 'little' features.

[SWBTATTReg]

20. And 'tricky dicky', referring to ex-president Richard Nixon...

[RexLipton]

9. Free speech for me...

But not for thee.

[onenote]

13. Huh?

[Bayard]

10. trump wants a margin on the profits

Then he'd have no problem with them.

[onenote]

12. He has nothing to do with this case.

Just don't want DUers to be confused by your post.

[ShazzieB]

17. Sounds fairly straightforward to me.

The agency will try to convince the justices to uphold a 1946 federal law that bars trademarks featuring a person's name without consent.

If there's a federal law that says this, I don't even understand the point of the court case, unless he's hoping SCOTUS will declare the law unconstitutional

Make all the shirts you want, dude. You just can't trademark a phrase that includes someone's name.

[dickthegrouch]

18. If you trump too low in a card game, you can lose the trick.

I think it’s a brilliant play on words calling TFG a loser. Truth and accuracy in three words. Better than we get from the supposed subject in entire “speeches“.
YW.

[Traildogbob]

21. My Tee shirt to patent

TRUMP
🍄
2.024”