语境愈合:如何处理诽谤性商标和兰哈姆法案2(a)

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Megan M. Carpenter
{"title":"语境愈合:如何处理诽谤性商标和兰哈姆法案2(a)","authors":"Megan M. Carpenter","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2872286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Offensive trademarks have come to the forefront of trademark policy and practice in recent years. While it was once true that more attention had been paid to Lanham Act section 2(a) in the pages of law reviews than in the courts, recent prominent cases have focused attention on the ban on registration of offensive marks and the widespread impact of this ban on trademark owners. In this Article, I answer the fundamental question: Given the problems that my previous research has identified, what should be done about the 2(a) bar on registration of scandalous trademarks? This Article argues, as a preliminary matter, that the registration bar on scandalous marks should be removed from the Lanham Act because morality is outside the function and purpose of trademark law. Furthermore, removal of the bar would be in line with other forms of intellectual property, which have moved away from regulating morality. Finally, removing the bar would resolve concerns about the constitutionality of section 2(a). However, if the 2(a) bar remains part of the Lanham Act, it should be applied in a way that is fair and effective within in the legal framework of trademark law. Specifically, this Article argues that trademark examiners should evaluate offensiveness in the same way other bars to registration — and content in broadcast media — are evaluated: by considering the context of the marketplace.","PeriodicalId":46736,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Law Journal","volume":"68 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contextual Healing: What to Do About Scandalous Trademarks and Lanham Act 2(a)\",\"authors\":\"Megan M. Carpenter\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2872286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Offensive trademarks have come to the forefront of trademark policy and practice in recent years. While it was once true that more attention had been paid to Lanham Act section 2(a) in the pages of law reviews than in the courts, recent prominent cases have focused attention on the ban on registration of offensive marks and the widespread impact of this ban on trademark owners. In this Article, I answer the fundamental question: Given the problems that my previous research has identified, what should be done about the 2(a) bar on registration of scandalous trademarks? This Article argues, as a preliminary matter, that the registration bar on scandalous marks should be removed from the Lanham Act because morality is outside the function and purpose of trademark law. Furthermore, removal of the bar would be in line with other forms of intellectual property, which have moved away from regulating morality. Finally, removing the bar would resolve concerns about the constitutionality of section 2(a). However, if the 2(a) bar remains part of the Lanham Act, it should be applied in a way that is fair and effective within in the legal framework of trademark law. Specifically, this Article argues that trademark examiners should evaluate offensiveness in the same way other bars to registration — and content in broadcast media — are evaluated: by considering the context of the marketplace.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46736,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hastings Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hastings Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2872286\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2872286","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,攻击性商标已成为商标政策和实践的前沿问题。虽然在法律评论中对《兰哈姆法》第2(a)条的关注曾经比在法庭上更多,但最近的突出案例将注意力集中在禁止注册攻击性商标以及这一禁令对商标所有者的广泛影响上。在这篇文章中,我回答了一个基本问题:鉴于我之前的研究已经确定的问题,应该如何处理关于诽谤性商标注册的第2(a)条禁令?本文初步认为,由于道德不属于商标法的功能和目的,诽谤性商标的注册限制应当从《兰哈姆法》中移除。此外,取消禁令将与其他形式的知识产权相一致,这些知识产权已经不再规范道德。最后,取消禁令将解决对第2(a)条是否符合宪法的关切。但是,如果2(a)条禁令仍然是Lanham Act的一部分,则应在商标法的法律框架内以公平有效的方式适用。具体而言,本文认为商标审查员应该以与评估其他注册障碍和广播媒体内容相同的方式来评估冒犯性:通过考虑市场背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contextual Healing: What to Do About Scandalous Trademarks and Lanham Act 2(a)
Offensive trademarks have come to the forefront of trademark policy and practice in recent years. While it was once true that more attention had been paid to Lanham Act section 2(a) in the pages of law reviews than in the courts, recent prominent cases have focused attention on the ban on registration of offensive marks and the widespread impact of this ban on trademark owners. In this Article, I answer the fundamental question: Given the problems that my previous research has identified, what should be done about the 2(a) bar on registration of scandalous trademarks? This Article argues, as a preliminary matter, that the registration bar on scandalous marks should be removed from the Lanham Act because morality is outside the function and purpose of trademark law. Furthermore, removal of the bar would be in line with other forms of intellectual property, which have moved away from regulating morality. Finally, removing the bar would resolve concerns about the constitutionality of section 2(a). However, if the 2(a) bar remains part of the Lanham Act, it should be applied in a way that is fair and effective within in the legal framework of trademark law. Specifically, this Article argues that trademark examiners should evaluate offensiveness in the same way other bars to registration — and content in broadcast media — are evaluated: by considering the context of the marketplace.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Hastings College of the Law was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California, and today is one of the top-rated law schools in the United States. Its alumni span the globe and are among the most respected lawyers, judges and business leaders today. Hastings was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California and is one of the most exciting and vibrant legal education centers in the nation. Our faculty are nationally renowned as both teachers and scholars.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信