← All Authorities
United States Leading Case trademarks

Matal v Tam

582 U.S. 218 (2017)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year2017
StatusBinding authority

Summary

The Lanham Act's disparagement clause is unconstitutional as a viewpoint-based restriction on speech under the First Amendment.

Key Principle

The Lanham Act's disparagement clause violates the First Amendment; the government may not deny trademark registration based on the viewpoint expressed by the mark.

Area of Law

ip

Related Cases

Cantarella Bros Pty Ltd v Modena Trading Pty Ltd (2014) 254 CLR 337

Foreign words used as trademarks are assessed for descriptiveness in the Australian English-speaking market; Italian words for coffee were registrable as not inherently descriptive.

Phonographic Performance Company of Australia Ltd v Commonwealth (2012) 246 CLR 561

Statutory licence scheme for sound recordings validly enacted under constitutional copyright power and did not constitute an unjust acquisition of property.

Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Ltd (2012) 248 CLR 42

An ISP that failed to act on infringement notices did not authorise subscribers' copyright infringement via BitTorrent, as it lacked the requisite control over the infringing acts.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Matal v Tam and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Matal v Tam