Document Type


Publication Date



AIPLA Quarterly Journal




Many tobacco company trademarks, such as MARLBORO, are extremely valuable. But valuable trademarks are often vulnerable both to copyists and to parodists. Tobacco trademarks face the additional vulnerability of onerous public health regulations, which can limit their appearance and use. When tobacco companies challenge these health regulations they do so on the grounds that the regulations violate their First Amendment speech rights. The law that is applied in these challenges is well developed, clear and predictable. When tobacco companies challenge unauthorized third-party uses of their marks, the speech rights involved are dealt with in a distinctly different manner. Under trademark law there is an assortment of approaches to protecting speech therefore making it difficult to predict outcomes. How can the non-false use of a trademark be so robustly protected as speech in one case and so slackly protected in the other? Juxtaposing these areas of law through the litigation strategies of one industry reveals curious presuppositions about speech in both laws.



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.