We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
TRIBAL (DE)TERMINATION? COMMERCIAL SPEECH, NATIVE AMERICAN IMAGERY AND CULTURAL SOVEREIGNTY.
- Authors
Zenor, Jason
- Abstract
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Matal v. Tam that the disparagement clause in the Lanham Act was unconstitutional. This case was just another in a line of commercial speech cases to expand the rights of corporations. This ruling also further limits the legal options for tribes to protect their cultural identity from exploitation. In response, this paper forwards a legal argument applying the tenets of federal Indian law and commercial speech doctrine to assist tribes in protecting their cultural sovereignty. First, the paper examines prominent cases of cultural misappropriation in sports, fashion and sin advertising. Next, the paper outlines the foundations of commercial speech law and federal Indian law. Finally, the paper argues that pursuant to the federal trust responsibility--Central Hudson and Montana--tribal cultural property should receive special protection against unauthorized use in the commercial sphere.
- Subjects
SOVEREIGNTY; UNITED States appellate courts; TRADEMARK Act of 1946 (U.S.)
- Publication
Southwestern Law Review, 2019, Vol 48, Issue 1, p81
- ISSN
1944-3706
- Publication type
Article