David Levitt Discusses SCOTUS Ruling that Disparaging Trademarks are Protected Speech
In The News | less than 1 min read
Oct 19, 2017
David Levitt, a Hinshaw partner and trial lawyer, discusses in the Fall 2017 edition of DRI's In-House Defense Quarterly the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Matal v. Tam, that considered whether prohibiting "disparaging" trademarks was constitutional. In a ruling published earlier this summer, the Court determined that such trademarks were protected speech under the First Amendment. The case received considerable media attention, due to efforts to cancel the registration of the Washington Redskins under the "disparagement" definition contained in §1052(a) of the Lanham Act.
Read the full article (PDF)
Featured Insights

Insights for Employers Alert
Jun 9, 2026
A Win for Employers: Federal District Court Finds $100,000 H-1B Visa Petition Fee is Unlawful

Press Release
Jun 9, 2026
Calvin Edwards Honored With 2026 Rising Star Award by the Black Men Lawyers’ Association

Webinar
Jun 9, 2026
John DeLascio Speaks on How Social Inflation is Reshaping Insurance Risk

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jun 8, 2026
Court Distinguishes Between Clickwrap and Browsewrap Arbitration Agreements

Webinar
Jun 8, 2026
Aimee Delaney and Jason Oliveri Speak on Workplace Generative AI Usage

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jun 8, 2026
New York’s Sweeping Motor Vehicle Tort Law Reforms: More Than Meets the Eye

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Jun 5, 2026
AI Governance Expectations on the Rise for Insurers Amid New Regulatory Activity

Press Release
Jun 4, 2026
Hinshaw Recognized Nationally in 2026 Chambers USA Directory

In The News
Jun 3, 2026
Scott Seaman Discusses Wrongful-Death and Survival Actions Handbook on IICLE Podcast




