Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comThe Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comDisparaging band names may turn off potential listeners and dissuade retailers and online marketplaces from carrying albums, but when it comes to who may reject the group, the buck stops with the government.
The ruling on the Washington Redskins’ name, in which the team’s trademark was denied, may lead the casual observer to think otherwise. However, a recent decision on the name of an Asian-American band called The Slants established that while the government may not approve of a trademark, it cannot cancel it for that reason. In July, a federal judge revoked the football team’s federal trademark on the Redskin’s name, citing a legal standard that allows cancelation if a name disparages a substantial subset of a certain group – in the case of the Redskins, that group is Native Americans. The judge noted that the government has editorial control over federal trademark registers.
However, a more recent ruling granted The Slants permission to trademark their potentially disparaging name. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that a trademark does not transform the band’s name, initially classified as private speech, into government speech. Due of this, the government has no right to cancel a trademark just because it considers it disparaging. In the decision, the court compared trademarks to birth certificates, street parades or driver’s licenses, none of which the government can revoke on the grounds of disparaging speech.
The ruling is not only a potential win for the Washington Redskins, but for any group that wishes to trademark a name some people may find offensive. If your band name may be disparaging to a certain group of people, but you’d like to trademark it, speak with an experienced entertainment law attorney for more information on trademark law.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

Arbitration resolves disputes privately before an arbitrator whose decision is usually final, while litigation resolves them in court with full rights of appeal. Whether a business ends up in arbitration or litigation is often decided when it signs the contract, long before any dispute arises. Key Takeaways When facing a contract dispute, carefully consider your […]
Author: Graham Staton

Can you own part of a business in New Jersey without a written agreement? Yes, it is possible. Under New Jersey’s Uniform Partnership Act, a partnership can arise when two or more people carry on a business as co-owners for profit, whether or not they ever intended to form one. Ownership doesn’t necessarily depend on […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For New Jersey businesses, crisis preparedness should be viewed as a legal and operational function, not simply an emergency-management exercise. A well-designed crisis response plan can help preserve evidence, protect confidential communications, meet reporting obligations, limit unnecessary exposure, and prevent an already difficult situation from becoming a larger legal problem. Key Takeaways A serious crisis […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Monmouth County is entering a significant new phase of development. For those looking to acquire property or undertake a new project, understanding the market opportunity is only the beginning. The more important question is whether a particular property can actually be developed as contemplated and what approvals, agreements, and other conditions will be required to […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe

Whether a client’s prompts to a generative AI tool and the documents it produces are protected from disclosure depends on the case type, who claims protection, and whether counsel was involved. In United States v. Heppner, a New York federal judge ruled that a criminal defendant’s communications with an AI platform were protected by neither […]
Author: Chris Seelinger
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!