Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
That cuts right to the point. The band name is The Slants, it's not "AllAsianPeopleMustBeTorturedAndKilled"
I would argue that ANY name should be trademark-able because the government is not the correct entity to decide if a brand is worthy of affection or not... consumers can decide the fate of any brand by choosing to buy it or reject it. However, even if one believes that the government should be rejecting derogatory brands, it's painfully obvious that one bureaucrat can find almost any name objectionable.... and what happens when someone starts filing complaints about "Hustler", "Playboy", "Shemale" or any number of other brands that have cost millions to build over an extended period of time?  |
Hustler is a brand, Playboy is a brand. Shemale is not a brand. It is an older and dying term used to designate a sexual orientation. It's like someone trying to trademark "bread."
Who else can designate name approvals for brands when you are asking the government to give stamp approval for them? I agree, government is not the choice or a good choice but what are the alternatives? A completely impartial, non-lobbyist controlled entity? Is there one anymore?