[oman]

That being said, unlike a right to free speech, there is no constitutional right to trademark protection. The government is not obligated to provide trademark protection, except in accordance with the US code (which I cited, and which specifically says that offensive trademarks are disallowed, as are other categories, for example geographic trademarks regions Champaign). Trademarks exist primarily for the benefit of the consumer, not the benefit of the mark owner.  From the wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Other_aspects): "Trademark law is designed to fulfill the public policy objective of consumer protection, by preventing the public from being misled as to the origin or quality of a product or service. By identifying the commercial source of products and services, trademarks facilitate identification of products and services which meet the expectations of consumers as to quality and other characteristics."

BC

Thanks for your clarity on the subject, BC.  I do need to find some time to read the opinion and figure out where being protected from disparaging remarks fits into the trademark office's fiat.

[oman]

That being said, unlike a right to free speech, there is no constitutional right to trademark protection. The government is not obligated to provide trademark protection, except in accordance with the US code (which I cited, and which specifically says that offensive trademarks are disallowed, as are other categories, for example geographic trademarks regions Champaign). Trademarks exist primarily for the benefit of the consumer, not the benefit of the mark owner.  From the wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Other_aspects): "Trademark law is designed to fulfill the public policy objective of consumer protection, by preventing the public from being misled as to the origin or quality of a product or service. By identifying the commercial source of products and services, trademarks facilitate identification of products and services which meet the expectations of consumers as to quality and other characteristics."

BC

Thanks for your clarity on the subject, BC.  I do need to find some time to read the opinion and figure out where being protected from disparaging remarks fits into the trademark office's fiat.