[97fan]

I contend that there is a strong basis to assume that further more onerous infringements on First Amendment rights will follow this government agency ruling.

You may fear that First Amendment rights will be further eroded as a result of this trademark ruling. But the actual trend in First Amendment jurisprudence is in the opposite direction -- it's toward an expansion of free-speech rights. The most obvious recent example is the Citizens United decision, which was preceded by a line of political-speech decisions that laid the groundwork. But I think it's true more broadly, too. Is there any type of speech (religious, commercial, press freedom, etc.) where the trend has been greater restrictions over the last few decades? I don't think so, though I'm sure someone here will correct me if I'm wrong.

[97fan]

I contend that there is a strong basis to assume that further more onerous infringements on First Amendment rights will follow this government agency ruling.

You may fear that First Amendment rights will be further eroded as a result of this trademark ruling. But the actual trend in First Amendment jurisprudence is in the opposite direction -- it's toward an expansion of free-speech rights. The most obvious recent example is the Citizens United decision, which was preceded by a line of political-speech decisions that laid the groundwork. But I think it's true more broadly, too. Is there any type of speech (religious, commercial, press freedom, etc.) where the trend has been greater restrictions over the last few decades? I don't think so, though I'm sure someone here will correct me if I'm wrong.