Chew on This: Where should the line be between the Lanham Act and the First Amendment?
The Jack Daniels v. VIP Properties (also known as Jack Daniels v. Bad Spaniels) case is currently pending before the Supreme Court of the United States and involves the decades-long tension between the First Amendment and trademark law. In this roundtable discussion, trademark attorney Daphne Benford-Smith of the Benford-Smith Law Firm will lead participants in a Socratic roundtable discussion about how to address that tension, both legally and practically. Participants will be given a synopsis to read before discussing and debating how federal courts should handle parody and other forms of “artistic expression” guaranteed by the First Amendment. In particular, participants can expect to discuss:
- Whether courts should apply the Rogers Standard (Rogers v. Grimaldi) to First Amendment and trademark issues
- The role, if any, the Trademark Dilution Revision Act has in First Amendment and trademark issues
- How thin or wide the line between parody and non-artistic is and should be
- The potential benefits and consequences of courts applying the Rogers Standard to trademark practice