Abstract
This paper explores the limits of the commercial speech doctrine and applies it to the controversy over the Washington Redskins team name. It advocates that a trademark is a time-manner-place restriction on speech and deserves intermediate scrutiny protection, rather than rational basis or strict scrutiny protection. It then argues that, under this doctrine, revocation of the team's trademarks is unconstitutional.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
