Pryor Cashman Partner Dyan Finguerra-DuCharme, co-chair of the Intellectual Property Group, spoke with Bloomberg Law about the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection of the “Trump Too Small” trademark registration in Vidal v. Elster.

“Narrow ‘Trump Too Small’ Edict May Yet Stem Trademark Ban Blitz” reviews the Court’s ruling, which held that the Lanham Act’s name clause prohibiting registering trademarks using names of living people without their consent was constitutional, thereby rejecting Elster’s trademark. The unanimous ruling marks a potential slowdown for First Amendment challenges to trademark restrictions.

In the case, attorney Steve Elster contended that the Lanham Act’s rule against implying an association with a living person would solve concerns about publicity rights, and that no one would believe Trump would approve a negative message. Dyan, in line with the Court’s decision, disagrees with Elster’s approach:

IP attorney Dyan Finguerra-DuCharme of Pryor Cashman LLP, though, called that suggestion “baloney,” as famous people want commercial control over their identity regardless. She said she wished the court had delved into the concept of publicity rights and false association.

Read the full article using the link below (subscription may be required).