Iancu v. Brunetti

Erik Brunetti sought to register the trademark FUCT, but the Patent and Trademark Office refused because federal law barred "immoral" or "scandalous" marks. The Supreme Court said that part of the Lanham Act violates the First Amendment because it discriminates based on viewpoint.

The Court said the "immoral or scandalous" registration bar is unconstitutional because it is viewpoint based, but the prompt does not provide the vote count or opinion lineup.

The decision limits the government's power to deny trademark registration based on officials' views about what is offensive. For example, a business using provocative language cannot be turned away from federal registration just because the government sees the mark as immoral or scandalous.

The Court has finished this docket action. The Patent and Trademark Office must process applications without using this part of the law, including Brunetti's application.

The case asked whether the government could refuse to register trademarks it viewed as immoral or scandalous. The Court said that rule violated the First Amendment.

Trademark applicants and the Patent and Trademark Office are directly affected. Officials cannot reject a mark simply because they see its message as offensive.

The case is over at the Supreme Court. The Patent and Trademark Office must handle Brunetti's application without relying on the invalidated ban.