After a federal court agreed with Tam and his band, the Patent and Trademark Office sued to avoid being compelled to register its name as a trademark. On Monday, the Supreme Court sided with The Slants.
It remains a mystery who leaked the draft, and according to three CNN sources, High Court officials are “taking steps to require law clerks to provide cell phone records and sign affidavits” as part of their investigation.
"We grew up and the notion of having slanted eyes was always considered a negative thing," Tam said in January. "Kids would pull their eyes back in a slant-eyed gesture to make fun of us. ... I wanted to change it to something that was powerful, something that was considered beautiful or a point of pride instead."
The Slants' frontman, Simon Tam, filed the original lawsuit after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office kept the band from registering its name.
In 2006, Tam launched The Slants. He says the band's name was chosen "as a way of seizing control of a racial slur, turning it on its head and draining its venom. It was also a respectful nod to Asian-Americans who had been using the epithet for decades.".
By David L. Hudson Jr. In Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. __ (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled 8-0 that a federal law prohibiting trademark names that disparage others was unconstitutional because “speech may not be banned on the grounds that it expresses ideas that offend.”
They filed an application for a trademark to register their band name with the USPTO, but the office rejected the band's application. Relying on the disparagement clause, the USPTO found the name “The Slants” offensive toward Asian-Americans.
Jiang by 2015. The band's name originates from an effort of reappropriation and was the source of a protracted legal battle that took them to the Supreme Court of the United States....The SlantsAlso known asSlantsOriginPortland, Oregon, U.S.GenresRock dance-rock synthpop electroclashYears active2006–present6 more rows
Matal v. TamCitations582 U.S. ___ (more) 137 S. Ct. 1744; 198 L. Ed. 2d 366; 122 U.S.P.Q.2d 1757Case historyPriorIn re Tam, 808 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2015); cert. granted, 137 S. Ct. 30 (2016).Holding14 more rows
It explained that the registration of trademarks that disparaged or brought into contempt or disrepute any person, living or dead, violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment because it offended a bedrock First Amendment principle that speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that ...
Matal v. Tam is a landmark decision because it struck down part of a 1946 law, finding that racially offensive trademarks, like the “The Slants” or the football team name “The Redskins,” enjoy full freedom of speech protection under the First Amendment. Accordingly, the government cannot deny such trademarks.
When the government engages in content discrimination, it is restricting speech on a given subject matter. When it engages in viewpoint discrimination, it is singling out a particular opinion or perspective on that subject matter for treatment unlike that given to other viewpoints.
The Lanham (Trademark) Act ( Pub. L. 79–489, 60 Stat. 427, enacted July 5, 1946, codified at 15 U.S.C....Lanham Act.CitationsStatutes at Large60 Stat. 427CodificationTitles amended15Legislative history3 more rows
Simon TamBass guitarJoe X. JiangGuitarKen ShimaVocalsTyler ChenDrum KitYuya MatsudaDrum KitThe Slants/Members
The government doesn't get to punish offensive speech. That's the resounding message of the U.S. Supreme Court's unanimous decision Monday in Matal v. Tam, which struck down as unconstitutional the provisions of federal trademark law allowing the denial of registration for offensive or scandalous marks.
Portland, ORThe Slants / Origin
Attorney Lee Rowland of the American Civil Liberties Union welcomed the Supreme Court's decision: "The government's misguided effort to protect minorities from disparagement instead hurt members of that very community by hindering their right to compete in the marketplace of ideas.
The Slants' frontman, Simon Tam, filed the original lawsuit after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office kept the band from registering its name. The Slants' frontman, Simon Tam, filed the original lawsuit after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office kept the band from registering its name.
After a federal court agreed with Tam and his band, the Patent and Trademark Office sued to avoid being compelled to register its name as a trademark. On Monday, the Supreme Court sided with The Slants.
This is where Simon Tam and Joe Jiang of The Slants, an all-Asian-American dance-rock band, perform on Thursday evening. Tam, the band's founder, casually mentions his Supreme Court case onstage. "We were fighting against the U.S. government for the right to use our name," he says. The bassist was referring to Matal v.
Earlier this month, the band formed The Slants Foundation, a nonprofit seeking to provide resources to "Asian Americans looking to incorporate activism into their art," in an effort to help other artists. Days before entering the Supreme Court, The Slants released their album The Band Who Must Not Be Named on Martin Luther King Day.
memorial dedicated to the civil rights leader, and there Tam saw a quote from King: "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.". Tam agreed, but he also found himself thinking that the arc bends only when people work to bend it.