![]() |
|
|||||||
| Law News Breaking law news and events. |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
News
Last Online:
Jul 16th, 2008 11:37 AM Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog
Posts: 640
|
Thomas O’Brien, the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, has a reputation for aggressiveness. Now he’s taking on the Mongols, a West Coast motorcycle gang whose Web site, depicting a skull smoking a cigarette, sends chills down our spine.
![]() A Mongols’ motorcycle gang member vest is displayed during a news conference Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2008, in Los Angeles. (AP/Ric Francis) Amid accusations of “crimes and acts of violence” by federal prosecutors, O’Brien says the Mongols’ trademark will go to the government. “This trademark is subject to forfeiture,” O’Brien said yesterday. “If the court grants our request . . . then if any law enforcement officer sees a Mongol wearing his patch, he will be authorized to stop that gang member and literally take the jacket right off his back.” (Lucky enforcement officer!) As McClatchy reports, the trademark forfeiture move comes as authorities filed a 177-page indictment charging 79 Mongols with an assortment of racketeering, drug and money laundering offenses. Prosecutors identified for potential forfeiture the Mongols’ name, a home in West Covina, Calif., and “at least” $5 million. Forfeiture would follow conviction. Yesterday, U.S. District Court Judge Florence-Marie Cooper, according to the AP, granted an injunction that prohibits gang members, their family members and associates from wearing, licensing, selling or distributing the logo, which typically depicts the profile of a Mongolian warrior wearing sunglasses. “It’s an interesting theory, but you’ve really got to wonder whether it would have any practical effect,” David B. Smith, formerly the deputy director of the Justice Department’s asset forfeiture office, told McClatchy. “My hunch is the Mongols are just going to keep wearing their patches.” Free speech scholar Rodney Smolla, dean of the Washington and Lee University School of Law, told McClatchy that the DOJ’s action poses the possibility of First Amendment violation. “I will have no comment to offer,” said Michael Doram, the Mongols’ attorney who filed the trademark application in 2003. Last edited by top_admin : Oct 23rd, 2008 at 10:03 AM. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Legal flaw could give guns back to domestic abusers | forum_admin | Other Criminal Law Matters | 1 | Nov 17th, 2008 02:05 AM |
| dealer takes back car and won't give back down payment | cvdao | Miscellaneous Topics | 1 | Nov 10th, 2008 03:50 PM |
| Won't give back personal items. | Unregistered | Small Claims Courts | 1 | Sep 11th, 2008 10:09 AM |
| Is there any reason a person should have to give back a gift once it is given? | Unregistered | Miscellaneous Topics | 1 | Feb 21st, 2008 04:44 PM |
| Friends storing items at house - claiming I did not give all back. | Unregistered | Small Claims Courts | 3 | May 31st, 2007 06:00 PM |