via American Freedom Law Center.
On April 8, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a notice of appeal
in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in
response to the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board’s (TTAB) affirmance
of the denial of the “Stop Islamisation of America” or “SIOA” trademark
application, which was sought by anti-sharia advocates Pamela Geller and
Robert Spencer.
Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer,
executive directors of the human rights organization, the Freedom
Defense Initiative (FDI), applied to the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) to register the trademark “Stop the
Islamisation of America” to foster and provide an understanding of how
to prevent sharia-based tyranny and Islamist terrorism.
The USPTO rejected FDI’s application in an
“Office Action” based on the following analysis: (1) “Islamisation”
means converting to Islam or “to make Islamic;” and (2), “Stop” would be
understood to mean that “action must be taken to cease, or put an end
to, converting or making people in America conform to Islam.” Thus, the
trademark, according to the “Office Action” ruling, disparaged Muslims
and linked them to terrorism.
As a result, AFLC appealed the rejection
of the SIOA mark to the TTAB, filing a detailed and lengthy brief
opposing the USPTO’s ruling. The AFLC brief demonstrated that the term
“Islamisation” is not broadly defined as a conversion of an individual;
or even a whole society to the religion of Islam; or to the state of
being more culturally Islamic. Rather, AFLC argued, “Islamisation” is
the process of implementing sharia into a society in order to convert
that society to a sharia-compliant Islamic state.
At oral argument before the TTAB in
Arlington, Virginia, David Yerushalmi, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior
Counsel, argued that the only probative evidence in the record for the
actual meaning of “Islamisation” was that presented by his clients and
which showed beyond any doubt that Muslims and non-Muslims alike used
and understood “Islamisation” to be the political movement to implement
Islamic law or sharia as the law of the land.
Yerushalmi commented: “The TTAB’s opinion
upholding the USPTO’s rejection of the mark was forced to bend itself
into a pretzel to get around the only evidence in the record. The term
‘Islamisation’ is a political movement – not religious conversion – and
it can be traced to the Muslim Brotherhood, where it is found in their
own documents advocating ‘civilizational jihad.’ Furthermore, the term
is used frequently in professional and academic contexts. Therefore,
‘stopping Islamisation’ and linking this doctrine to terrorism does not
implicate good, patriotic, loyal Muslims in America; instead, it is an
important educational tool that raises awareness about those who seek
the demise of our constitutional Republic through a sharia-based
political process.”
AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel Robert
Muise commented: “It is crucial that Americans understand the threat
that our Nation faces from sharia-adherent Islam, especially from
stealth jihadists who covertly seek to perpetuate sharia into American
society. This trademark does exactly that.”
Once the Notice of Appeal is accepted, the
USPTO must transfer the relevant filings to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which will then set a briefing
schedule.
No comments:
Post a Comment