# Does the Army Have A Leg To Stand On? -Trademark Rules **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 6, 2006, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-army-have-a-leg-to-stand-on-trademark-rules/355620 "2006-05-06T00:22:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2006, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-army-have-a-leg-to-stand-on-trademark-rules/355620/1 "2006-05-06T00:22:42Z")
The army has it in for a group called ‘West Point Graduates Against the War.’ However, the military’s means of attack seems pretty dodgey to me, trademark law: [‘West Point’ Off Limits to Anti-War Alums](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060505/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/anti_war_graduates_1) > [@](#): > > The Army warned an anti-war group of former U.S. Military Academy cadets to stop using the words “West Point” in its name, saying they are trademarked. > … > The Army registered the words “West Point” — as well as “United States Military Academy,” “USMA,” and “U.S. Army” — as trademarks in 2000 to control their use on educational material and commercial goods. Trademark links are ephemeral so here’s the [USPTO](http://www.uspto.gov/main/trademarks.htm), and the meat of the ‘West Point’ trademark: > [@](#): > > Word Mark WEST POINT > Goods and Services IC 014. US 002 027 028 050. G & S: Commemorative coins and medallions, earrings, pendants, lapel pins, tie tacks, tie bars, belt buckles of precious metal, cuff links of precious metal, watches, cigarette lighters of precious metal. FIRST USE: 19750100. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19750100 > > IC 016. US 002 005 022 023 029 037 038 050. G & S: Brochures and news letter of Academy functions, catalogs and guide books regarding activities at the United States Military Academy and admission requirements, writing paper and envelopes, paper napkins, note cards, post card, pens and pencils. FIRST USE: 19230700. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19230700 > > IC 021. US 002 013 023 029 030 033 040 050. G & S: Glass and porcelain beverageware. FIRST USE: 19230700. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19230700 > > IC 024. US 042 050. G & S: Towels and bed blankets. FIRST USE: 19750100. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19750100 > > IC 025. US 022 039. G & S: Men’s wear. FIRST USE: 19230700. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19230700 > > IC 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: Golf Balls, golf club covers, Christmas tree ornaments, jigsaw puzzles. FIRST USE: 19750100. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19750100 > > IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Educational services, namely, conducting classes in physical education, military training and all manner of academic subjects at the undergraduate level; entertainment services, namely, conducting athletic contests, live theatrical performance and live musical performances. FIRST USE: 19230700. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19230700 > > IC 035. US 100 101 102. G & S: Retail store services, mail order and mail order catalog services featuring clothing, beverageware and giftware and giftware items. FIRST USE: 19230700. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19230700 > Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING > Design Search Code > Serial Number 75599378 > Filing Date November 25, 1998 > Current Filing Basis 1A > Original Filing Basis 1A > Published for Opposition November 30, 1999 > Registration Number 2320987 > Registration Date February 22, 2000 > Owner (REGISTRANT) DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FEDERAL AGENCY UNITED STATES Office of the Judge Advocate General DA ATTN: JALS-IP 901 N Stuart Street, Ste 700 Arlington VIRGINIA 222031837 Now if West Point Graduates Against the War were marketing golfballs or blankets, I could see where the army might have a case, but AFAIK, they’re not marketing anything that the trademark covers. Is there some legal principle that gives the army a case here, or are they just blowing smoke? ---
**Author:** ![WoodenTaco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/45deac/32.png) [@WoodenTaco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WoodenTaco)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2006, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-army-have-a-leg-to-stand-on-trademark-rules/355620/2 "2006-05-06T00:51:03Z")
AFAIK, as long as the group 1. is not using the name for commercial purposes, and 2. is not trying to be misleading in claiming the represent West Point as an institution, then the Army loses. I could be totally wrong, I’m just basing this off of the Jerry Falwell - Christopher Lamparello [imbroglio.](http://www.acluva.org/docket/lamparello.html) /not a lawyer ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2006, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-army-have-a-leg-to-stand-on-trademark-rules/355620/3 "2006-05-06T08:24:52Z")
The courts are very hesitant to interfere in legitimate political protest. George Lucas tried in 1985 to prevent the use of the registered trademark “Star Wars” in advocacy ads supporting and opposing President Reagan’s [Strategic Defense Initiative](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative). But Lucas lost the case when two federal judges ruled that “Star Wars” had entered the public lexicon and could be used for social criticism. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2006, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-army-have-a-leg-to-stand-on-trademark-rules/355620/4 "2006-05-06T15:14:33Z")
The name ‘West Point’ is certainly protected from commercial use. But courts tend to give acres of latitude in the area of political speech. All in all West Point ought to find more important things to spend their money on. They will lose. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2006, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-army-have-a-leg-to-stand-on-trademark-rules/355620/5 "2006-05-06T20:24:00Z")
> [@Paul in Saudi](#): > > The name ‘West Point’ is certainly protected from commercial use. But courts tend to give acres of latitude in the area of political speech. > > All in all West Point ought to find more important things to spend their money on. They will lose. I agree that they will surely lose. However, it’s a way for a branch of the Army to legally harass, and drain money from, the anti-war group. The Army already has a staff of lawyers, and they have deeper pockets than the WPGAW, so even though they’ll lose, the case will be harder on the WPGAW than on the Army.