Castaybert Associate Reece Brassler Co-Authors Amicus Brief For ‘FUCT’ Trademark Case, Iancu v. Brunetti


Brunetti, FUCT, streetwear
Category: Intellectual Property Law | Trademark Law

March 15, 2019 — The Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to hear another case concerning Section 2(a) (15 U.S.C. § 1052) of the Lanham Act.  The Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari following the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) rejection of Erik Brunetti’s trademark application for his streetwear brand ‘FUCT.’  The USPTO rejected the application on the grounds that it violated the “scandalous” provision of Section 2(a), making it unregistrable under Federal Law.

The Brunetti case arises from the ashes of Matal v. Tam, in which the Supreme Court ruled that the “disparagement” provision of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act infringed First Amendment rights under the Constitution.  Following that decision, it was clear that the scandalous provision of Section 2(a) may be the next to fail constitutional scrutiny.

As a member of the New York Intellectual Property Association’s Trademark Law & Practice Committee, Castaybert PLLC associate Reece Brassler worked with prominent New York area law firms and trademark attorneys to co-author and submit an Amicus Brief to the Supreme Court.  The NYIPLA did not submit the brief in support of either party, but argued that the scandalous provision of Section 2(a) infringed on the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and that Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act applies broadly to provide protections to trademarks not entitled to federal registration.

Follow the Iancu v. Brunetti proceedings here.

Learn more about how Castaybert PLLC can assist you with Trademark matters here.

Print This Post
Share Button
contact