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

Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter
Jun 29, 2026
Beyond Malpractice: The Rising Threat of Privacy and Statutory Claims Against Lawyers

In The News
Jun 26, 2026
Brian McGrath Discusses Far-Reaching Impact of a NY Foreclosure Ruling on Mortgage Industry

In The News
Jun 26, 2026
Jason Oliveri Discusses AI Companions in Elder Care and the Risks for LGBTQ+ Residents

Event
June 25-26, 2026
Todd Young Speaks on Importance of Financial Literacy to ESOP Culture

Press Release
Jun 25, 2026
Scott Seaman Appointed to DRI Center for Law and Public Policy’s Social Inflation Task Force

In The News
Jun 23, 2026
Michael Dowell Explores New OIG Compliance Expectations for MAOs

Press Release
Jun 23, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Reappointed as the ABA Antitrust Law Section Co-Chair of Comments

Press Release
Jun 22, 2026
Hinshaw Named a Client Service Standout Firm in BTI Consulting Client Service A-Team 2026

In The News
Jun 22, 2026
Lucy Wang Discusses California Insurance Solvency Regulation Addressing Climate Risks




