In 'FUCT' Fashion Brand Case, Justices Avoid Saying Word - NBC New York
National & International News
The day’s top national and international news

In 'FUCT' Fashion Brand Case, Justices Avoid Saying Word

The case has to do with a portion of federal law that says officials should not register trademarks that are "scandalous" or "immoral"

    processing...

    NEWSLETTERS

    In 'FUCT' Fashion Brand Case, Justices Avoid Saying Word
    AP
    Los Angeles artist Erik Brunetti, the founder of the streetwear clothing company "FUCT," leaves the Supreme Court after his trademark case was argued, in Washington, Monday, April 15, 2019. Brunetti, who says the brand name is an acronym for "Friends U Can't Trust," is seeking help from the high court after he was denied a trademark by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office because of a portion of federal law that says officials should not register trademarks that are "scandalous" or "immoral."

    None of the Supreme Court's justices wanted to say the four-letter word.

    The high court was discussing a trademark case Monday involving a Los Angeles-based fashion brand "FUCT." But the justices did some verbal gymnastics to get through about an hour of arguments without saying the brand's name.

    Chief Justice John Roberts described it as the "vulgar word at the heart of the case." Justice Samuel Alito called it "the word your client wants to use." And Justice Stephen Breyer called it "the word at issue."

    The case has to do with a portion of federal law that says officials should not register trademarks that are "scandalous" or "immoral." Officials have refused to register the brand's name as a result.

    'You Never Get Over It': 20 Years After Columbine

    [NATL] 'You Never Get Over It': A Look Back 20 Years After Columbine

    Family, friends, teachers and survivors look back twenty years after Columbine, in an anniversary made tougher by a threat from a South Florida high schooler. 

    (Published Friday, April 19, 2019)

    But the artist behind the brand, Erik Brunetti, argues that portion of law should be struck down as an unconstitutional restriction on speech.

    The government is defending the century-old provision, arguing it encourages trademarks that are appropriate for all audiences. Lawyer Malcolm Stewart, who was arguing for the Trump administration, said the law is not a restriction on speech but rather the government declining to promote certain speech.

    Stewart, for his part, also went to great lengths not to say the name of the brand, calling it "the equivalent of the profane past participle form of a well-known word of profanity and perhaps the paradigmatic word of profanity in our language."

    Brunetti and others like him who are denied trademark registration under the "scandalous" provision can still use the words they wanted to register for their business, nonprofit or brand, a point some justices underscored. They just don't get the benefits that come with registering a trademark. For Brunetti, that would largely mean a better ability to go after counterfeiters who knock off his designs.

    Brunetti's lawyer, John R. Sommer, got the closest to saying the brand's name, using the phrase "the F word" and noting his client's brand "isn't exactly" a "dirty" word.

    "Oh, come on. You know, come on," responded Alito, adding: "Be serious. We know...what he's trying to say."

    Mueller Report: 10 Instances of Possible Obstruction of Justice by Trump

    [NATL] Mueller Report: 10 Instances of Possible Obstruction of Justice by Trump

    Special counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election included instances of potential obstruction by President Donald Trump. Here is a rundown of the ten mentioned in the report.

    (Published Thursday, April 18, 2019)

    It wasn't clear from arguments how the case might ultimately come out, but Brunetti would seem to have a strong case. Two years ago, the justices unanimously invalidated a related provision of federal law that told officials not to register disparaging trademarks. In that case, an Asian-American rock band sued after the government refused to register its band name, "The Slants," because it was seen as offensive to Asians.

    During Monday's argument, some of the justices seemed troubled by what they suggested are inconsistent decisions by the United States Patent and Trademark Office about what gets tagged as scandalous or immoral.

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg noted that the office has refused to register some trademarks both by saying they are scandalous and, ironically, too confusingly similar to something that is already registered. For example, the office refused to register "FUK!T" for being scandalous and immoral but also confusingly similar to the already registered "PHUKIT."

    Justice Neil Gorsuch said, "There are shocking numbers of ones granted and ones refused" that "do look remarkably similar." Gorsuch suggested that the outcomes in such cases were as arbitrary as the "flip of a coin."

    "I don't want to go through the examples," he said to laughter. "I really don't want to do that."

    The case is 18-302, Iancu v. Brunetti.

    Trump Celebrates Mueller Report as Democrats Plan Next Step

    [NATL] Trump Celebrates Mueller Report as Democrat Lawmakers Plan Next Step

    President Donald Trump celebrated the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report into Russia collusion today, but Democrats say this story isn't over and are already talking about their next step. The report, which totals over 400 pages, neither condemns nor exonerates the president.

    (Published Thursday, April 18, 2019)