The U.S. solicitor general’s petition in a trademark dispute over the mark “FUCT.”
U.S. Supreme Court justices and the lawyers arguing before them went out of their way Monday to avoid the four letters at the very core of the case of Iancu v. Brunetti: FUCT.
The issue in the First Amendment case was whether “FUCT,” the name of Erik Brunetti’s line of clothing, could be trademarked, or whether it would violate the Lanham Act, which bans registration of “immoral … or scandalous matter.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
