EFF Urges Court to Reject LDS Church’s Trademark Lawsuit Against 'Mormon Stories' Podcast

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) has faced criticism for its aggressive use of trademark law to control the use of the term "Mormon," according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). In a recent legal move, the LDS Church filed a lawsuit against the "Mormon Stories" podcast, which discusses Mormonism and Mormon culture. The EFF, along with attorneys from Ballard Spahr, has filed an amicus brief urging the court to dismiss the case promptly.

The EFF has a history of opposing the LDS Church's attempts to monopolize the term "Mormon." In 2014, the EFF filed an amicus brief in a case where the church sued an online dating service for church members called Mormon Match. In 2016, the church threatened legal action against the Mormon Mental Health Association, a nonprofit for mental health professionals working with members of Mormon faiths. In 2025, the church pressured Burke Sorenson into changing the name of his Mormon News Roundup podcast.

The EFF's brief argues that trademark law should be used to help consumers identify the sources of products, not to suppress criticism. The brief urges the court to apply the Rogers test, a standard used in cases involving expressive works, which provides greater protection for free speech. This test allows courts to dismiss meritless trademark claims early in the litigation process, protecting speakers' rights.

The EFF contends that First Amendment safeguards are crucial in cases where a plaintiff seeks to control the use of a common term for its common meaning. Trademark law is not intended to extend to generic terms, as doing so would give trademark owners undue power to control discussions and debates on entire topics.

The EFF hopes that the court will dismiss the LDS Church's lawsuit and endorse the Rogers test, thereby putting an end to the church's "trademark bullying." The foundation argues that allowing such lawsuits to proceed would set a dangerous precedent, enabling powerful institutions to silence critics and stifle public discourse under the guise of trademark protection.