Judge rules Mongols can keep their logo...

[phill4paul]

Good on him....


SANTA ANA, Calif. — Nearly two months after a federal jury decided that a notorious motorcycle club must forfeit the rights to its trademarked emblem, a judge on Thursday nullified the verdict, finding that seizure of the intellectual property was unconstitutional.

In a 51-page ruling, Federal District Judge David O. Carter said the government’s strategy of trying to devastate the Mongols motorcycle club by confiscating its treasured Genghis Khan-style logo would violate the group’s First Amendment right to free speech and the excessive fines clause of the Eighth Amendment.

The decision upended years of efforts by prosecutors to weaken the Mongols, which a federal jury in January deemed a criminal enterprise after finding the group guilty of racketeering and racketeering conspiracy for the crimes of murder, attempted murder and drug dealing. In the second phase of that wide-ranging, eight-week trial, the jury found that the Mongols must give up their rights to the emblem, which is emblazoned on the vests, T-shirts and motorcycles of hundreds of members.

But Judge Carter declined to order the Mongols to forfeit the logo until he had a chance to review their arguments and consider their free speech rights.

“The Mongol Nation’s and its members’ right to express their identity through the noncommercial display of symbols constitutes speech subject to First Amendment protections,” Judge Carter wrote in the ruling released Thursday. He added that the First Amendment bars the government from using forfeiture laws in racketeering cases “to chill this expression.”

Judge Carter further wrote that since the jury determined that the Mongols logo was forfeitable only on the racketeering conspiracy count, but not racketeering itself, taking away the insignia was an inordinate punishment.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/us/mongol-motorcycle-club-ruling.html?fbclid=IwAR0WLnX-XeOuiHM4EdFvgZaYz0h5FFQoY-30rAyugKfyQeRxl-bfOSjdbFA

[Origanalist]

a federal jury decided that a notorious motorcycle club must forfeit the rights to its trademarked emblem,

"cause you know, people are just waiting for a legal way to use that emblem without being a member.

[oyarde]

I like it when a judge even mentions excessive fines .

[nobody's_hero]

I mean, I'm no criminal investigator, but if the group is really as bad as all that murder and racketeering, wouldn't you want them to be identifiable?

[Superfluous Man]

How would not having a trademark stop them from being able to exercise their freedom of speech and still use that symbol?

The First Amendment does not guarantee us a right to have our speech trademarked.

Also, what does it mean to confiscate a logo? Is it talking about confiscating physical representations of the logo, like jackets and stuff, or just declaring them not to have an exclusive legal right to use it?

[oyarde]

How would not having a trademark stop them from being able to exercise their freedom of speech and still use that symbol?

The First Amendment does not guarantee us a right to have our speech trademarked.

Also, what does it mean to confiscate a logo? Is it talking about confiscating physical representations of the logo, like jackets and stuff, or just declaring them not to have an exclusive legal right to use it?

I think the original intent was to forbid them from using it which seems strange .

[Superfluous Man]

I think the original intent was to forbid them from using it which seems strange .

I was wondering about that. The article isn't clear.

If that's true, then how would that be enforced? And who would be forbidden to use it? Just anyone whose name is on a government list somewhere, or all of us?

It doesn't add up, and from the article I can't tell what really happened here.

Edit: Maybe it means that the government tried to transfer the trademark from the Mongols' organization to itself, so that from then on the government would have exclusive rights to it and reserve the right to sue anyone else for infringing the trademark it owned? I don't know.

[oyarde]

I was wondering about that. The article isn't clear.

If that's true, then how would that be enforced? And who would be forbidden to use it? Just anyone whose name is on a government list somewhere, or all of us?

It doesn't add up, and from the article I can't tell what really happened here.

They probably do have lists of the enrolled members , but yes it is confusing .

[Superfluous Man]

They probably do have lists of the enrolled members , but yes it is confusing .

OK, they probably have something like that that's useful internally for police investigations. But not one that would be a basis for curtailing the rights of the people on that list for no reason other than being alleged enrolled members of a gang, unless it's a list of people who had individually been found guilty of some crime through due process, so that a curtailment of their rights could be a punishment for whatever their crime was.

[Superfluous Man]

Here's a helpful section of another article from back when they jury gave the ruling that was just overturned. It looks like the Judge in the case had some of the same questions I did.

[Judge] Carter, too, has questioned whether prosecutors could prevent individuals from wearing or displaying the Mongol insignia, even if the government owns the trademarks.

In a 2011 civil case by a Mongol member attacking prosecutors’ earlier forfeiture attempts, Carter held that “the government’s seizure of items bearing the Mongols mark and/or Image mark also would violate [the members’] rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

In the current criminal case, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2017 that the constitutional issues were not ripe for consideration at that time. Carter said Friday those issues are ripe now because of the jury’s verdict.

If the government is allowed to take the Mongols’ rights in the trademarks through forfeiture, one puzzling issue is what it will do with those rights. Trademark experts, including a defense witness, have said that trademark rights can only be claimed or maintained by being used.

In fact, the prosecution and the defense stipulated to the jury on Tuesday that the Mongols had used the “Mongols” and Genghis Khan cartoon mark continuously since 1969.

If a trademark isn’t actively used by the owner, typically in commerce, it can be deemed abandoned, which leaves it available for anyone to use. During a hearing last week, Carter sharply questioned prosecutors about whether the federal government would put the Mongols trademarks to use.
https://www.courthousenews.com/federal-jury-orders-mongols-bikers-club-to-forfeit-logos/

[shakey1]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/05/21/09/28ED151800000578-0-image-a-2_1432197080005.jpg