QUESTION: Is Bobby Chin, a retired Army colonel and incumbent Graham councilman, violating any rules or regulations by prominently featuring an Army trademark in yard signs for his reelection campaign?
ANSWER: It might not be grounds for a court martial, but the unauthorized use of military trademarks is a pretty big “no-no” – even if it’s in the service of a political campaign by a retired member of the armed forces.
The restrictions on military trademarks are part of a much broader regulatory minefield that former service members must hazard if they decide to seek political office at either the federal, state, or local level.
Most of these potential pitfalls are addressed in an official directive that the U.S. Department of Defense has issued on “political activities by members of the armed forces.”
According to this directive, all service members, including those who’ve retired, are encouraged “to carry out the obligations of citizenship.” Moreover, retirees and other members not on active duty are allowed to engage in political activities provided they’re “not in uniform” and abstain from anything that would suggest “the appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement” by the U.S. Armed Forces.
The DOD’s directive goes on to lay out some additional ground rules for political involvement, including campaigns for both partisan and nonpartisan office. Under these protocols, members not on active duty “may, in their campaign literature” mention “their military rank or grade and military service affiliation. But they must clearly indicate their retired or reserve status.”
The DOD also allows members to state their military bona fides and use photos of themselves in uniform if “accompanied by a prominent and clearly displayed disclaimer that neither the military information nor photographs imply endorsement.”
The department nevertheless forbids veterans to use photos of themselves in uniform “as the primary graphic representation in any campaign media.”
The DOD’s directive is entirely silent on the use of military trademarks, although this subject is treated in some detail in other U.S. government resources that are readily available online.
The Army, for instance, has a website that explicitly addresses the use of its pictorial trademarks – which include its iconic five-pointed star, its eagle-graced seal with its allusions to the Great Seal of the United States, and its “Soldier for Life” logo, which has some similarities to a graphic that pops up on Bobby Chin’s yard signs.
The Army’s website goes on to answer some frequently asked questions about these “marks,” including their potential use by veterans who run for political office. In response to this particular query, this FAQ lives up to the Army’s reputation for being clear and direct in its communication.
“No. You may not use the official Army Seal, Army Star or any other Army insignia or trademark in this manner,” the website asserts. “It might create the impression your candidacy is endorsed by or affiliated with the Army, or that the Army has chosen your candidacy over other candidates. You may not use your Army uniform, which bears several trademarks, for political gain. You may simply and accurately state you are an Army veteran.”
Chin, who rose to the rank of colonel during his three-decade career in the military, acknowledges that he wanted his campaign promotions to pay tribute to the Army’s preeminent role in his life. He is emphatic, however, that he never meant to infringe on the Army’s intellectual property in his campaign. Nor is he sure that there’s any actual use of restricted materials in his yard signs, which originally made their debut four years ago in his first campaign for Graham’s city council.
“My instructions to the artist who created [the yard sign] was that I wanted to have U.S. Army on it and that the Army colors are black and gold,” Chin went on to explain in a phone conversation on Wednesday. “I’m basically recycling these signs from when I first got elected.”
Chin went on to observe that the design which appears on his yard signs doesn’t duplicate any of the Army’s official logos. He added that, from what he can tell, the graphic bears more resemblance to the generic U.S. Army decals that appear in the free-to-use galleries of clip art that are available online.
“I’m looking at the sign,” he elaborated, “and it looks like it came from an online clip art library.
“I spent 30 years in the Army,” the incumbent council member continued. “I retired from the U.S. Army with an honorable discharge, and I never intended to violate any trademark laws”
