Jesus Jeans deemed ‘Morally Offensive’

In 1973, Italian Jesus Jeans ad with the line “he who loves me follows me”….

As well as the UK, it has been rejected in Germany, Switzerland, China, Hungary and Ireland.

The Patent Office registrar said the name would cause greater offence than mere distaste to a significant section of the general public, based on the view of a “right thinking member of the public”.

He said the name was was “contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality”.

However, in 1997 the Patent Office approved French Connection’s application to register FCUK as a brand.

In the case of Jesus Jeans, the Patent Office argued that the name Jesus would be “debased” if it were used to sell jeans and other products offered by the company such as soap, scent and shoes.

The ruling said the value of the name lay in the belief of Christians that Jesus is the Son of God, and although other religions were practised in the UK, most British people would associated only this meaning to the word.

The company that owns the brand, Basic Trademark, argued that the name Jesus is a popular name and that there was a difference between offence that amounted to distaste, and that of offence that would cause outrage or attract censure by undermining religious values.

Lawyers acting for Basic Trademark, WH Beck Greener & Co, told The Times: “Moral grounds should only be raised where there is a question of public order. The use of the word ‘Jesus’ as a mark is not likely to inflame public disorder.”

The brand has successfully registered the name Jesus in Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, France, Italy, and Spain, but its rejection in the UK is not the first.



  1. Maybe they could argue that Jesus is just a name, but when they use ads with taglines like those, then there is no question who they are talking about. I’m not religious myself, but I wouldn’t go around purposely disrespecting others’ beliefs.

  2. Yeah, it’s the Spanish name Jesus, not THAT Jesus ;). Surrre.

    This brand has been around a long time and based on those ads, they are skeevy. If I were the Lord, I wouldn’t be bothered as much by taking my name in vain as I would be by the fact the jeans and the ads are REALLY tacky.

  3. Greenfairie got jokes today!! Funny fairie that one!! LOL

    These ads are older than me! I was shocked that this was a current lawsuit, LOL.

  4. You mean “Thou shalt not have any other jeans but me”, signed, JESUS jeans, doesn’t sell it for you??

    Come on, you have to admit that is kind of funny, in a ‘I don’t think I could think of something that lame if I tried’ kind of way.

  5. let them try to use Allah or Muhammad as see how funny that would be. This is wrong.

  6. Oh come on. wrong?
    Here we go again with religion being given some special place of respect…for what?
    If it were Allah or any other imaginary god figure it would be exactly the same. they could have Santa Claus Jeans for all I care. no different.
    It is time that the world stopped giving religion a special ticket all the time.
    If they don’t like it, they don’t have to learn about it, read about it or, indeed, buy it!
    I don’t go into a church and then get annoyed at the rubbish they are spouting so why should it be different the other way around?
    I assume these jeans would be on sale. In a store. So, like the church analogy, if religious people are offended, do not go into that store!
    Offended when they see someone wearing the jeans?
    Get over it. Life does NOT revolve around you.
    I do the same when I see someone in the street spouting religion, wearing religious get up or just promoting religion.
    I just walk the other way.
    I get over it.
    I know the world is not there to please me and my beliefs so religion should be living by the same rules.
    I feel slightly better after that.

  7. I’m willing to let the God-botherers win this one and save ammunition for something more meaningful, like same sex marriage, but I am truly curious to know why the trademark registration was rejected in China.

  8. The ‘Jesus Jeans’ first came out in the early 70s. NO one made a big deal about ‘Jesus Christ Superstar’; so why did they object so much to this designer who was way ahead of his time? How come no one every talks about the offensive stuff Donatella Versace did? The drugged out fashion shows? The cocaine flying around everywhere and the sex with anybody/everybody? She started the anorexia craze.
    How can an add be so offensive when Calvin Klein, basically, said the same thing without using the ‘Jesus Jeans’ label?

  9. Hey guys, What would you say if some of the money made from a product like Jesus Jeans was going to missions. To help feed and cloth people in Africa, Cambodia, India and Vietnam etc. I am not talking about Jeans such as that skanky picture I had just seen. I am talking about down to earth Denim Jeans.

  10. I agree, if they had used allah or muhammed they would have major issues. Im appalled by the USPTO allowing this to begin with. Jesus is the most known name in the world, they are capitalizing and degrading our beliefs. Its like someone using your mom’s name on jeans and degrading her. This company will realize they will have to also face Jesus himself one day – wonder what they will say..

2 Pings & Trackbacks

  1. Pingback:

  2. Pingback: