LEGAL DISCLAIMER

(For Informational and Commercial Purposes Only – No Hate Speech, Advocacy, or Illegal Conduct Intended)

The sale of merchandise, including but not limited to items featuring the Swastika, Schutzstaffel (SS) symbols, Totenkopf (Death’s Head), Swartz feet, Confederate imagery, and other historically controversial symbols, is conducted in full compliance with U.S. federal law and under the protections afforded by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. This merchandise is sold solely for historical documentation, artistic expression, academic discourse, and commercial purposes and does not violate any federal, state, or international laws applicable in the United States.

This merchandise is not intended to promote, endorse, or incite violence, hate speech, extremist ideology, or illegal activity. The seller explicitly disavows and condemns any misuse of these items for unlawful purposes.

I. COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL LAW

1. No Violation of U.S. Criminal Law (Title 18 U.S.C.)

The sale and distribution of historically controversial symbols do not constitute a criminal offense under U.S. federal statutes, nor do they fall under the purview of laws criminalizing material support to designated foreign terrorist organizations, threats communicated across state lines, or federally recognized hate crimes. The applicable federal statutes, and their relevance, are outlined below:

18 U.S.C. § 2339A & § 2339B – Material Support for Terrorism

These statutes prohibit the provision of material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations.

The sale of merchandise bearing controversial symbols does not constitute material support, as defined under the statute, as there is no evidence or intent of coordination, funding, or resource provision to any entity deemed a terrorist organization by the U.S. Department of State.

Legal precedent, including Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U.S. 1 (2010), has upheld broad prohibitions on direct assistance to terrorist groups; however, this ruling does not apply to general commerce or sales made to individuals unaffiliated with such groups.

18 U.S.C. § 875(c) – Threatening Interstate Communications

This statute criminalizes the transmission of threats to injure another person via interstate communication.

Merchandise featuring historical or controversial symbols does not, in and of itself, constitute a threat under federal law.

The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Elonis v. United States, 575 U.S. 723 (2015), clarified that a subjective intent to threaten must be established, further protecting expressive commercial conduct that does not meet the standard of an actual, credible threat.

18 U.S.C. § 249 – Federal Hate Crimes Act

This law criminalizes willfully causing bodily injury or attempting to do so due to a person’s race, color, religion, or national origin.

The mere sale of historical symbols does not constitute an act of violence, intimidation, or targeted harassment as outlined in this statute.

In Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993), the Supreme Court ruled that penalty enhancements for bias-motivated crimes do not violate the First Amendment, but this principle applies strictly to acts of violence, not the sale of items with historical or ideological significance.

1. First Amendment Protections (U.S. Constitution)

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the sale and distribution of controversial symbols as a form of expressive conduct. The Supreme Court has consistently upheld the principle that restrictions on speech must meet strict scrutiny and be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.

Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343 (2003) – Defined “true threats” as statements made with serious intent to inflict harm. The sale of symbols alone does not meet this standard.

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) – Established the “imminent lawless action” test, which protects speech unless it is directed at inciting immediate violence. The sale of symbols does not satisfy this threshold.

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942) – Articulated the “fighting words” doctrine, which does not apply to the passive sale of historical or ideological symbols.

Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) – Defined obscenity, which does not encompass political or historical symbols.

Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission, 447 U.S. 557 (1980) – Established the commercial speech doctrine, which protects non-misleading advertising and sales of legal goods.

Given these precedents, the sale of items bearing controversial symbols remains constitutionally protected under the First Amendment.

1. Compliance with Commerce & Trademark Law

The merchandise sold does not infringe on any registered trademarks or misrepresent its origin in violation of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 1051-1127).

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. 218 (2017), struck down provisions of the Lanham Act that restricted the registration of offensive trademarks, reinforcing the principle that commerce cannot be restricted on the basis of viewpoint discrimination.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulates consumer protection and fair trade practices. The sale of these items does not involve deceptive advertising, fraud, or unfair business practices that would violate 15 U.S.C. § 45.

II. DISCLAIMERS OF INTENT & LIABILITY

The sale of these items is not intended to incite violence or unlawful behavior and does not violate any statutes criminalizing hate crimes, threats, or extremist support.

The seller explicitly disavows any ideological affiliation with extremist groups and sells items solely for educational, historical, and commercial purposes.

Buyers assume responsibility for compliance with applicable local laws.

III. INTERNATIONAL LAW COMPLIANCE

Some foreign jurisdictions, such as Germany (Strafgesetzbuch § 86a), restrict the sale and public display of Nazi-related symbols.

Buyers outside the U.S. are solely responsible for compliance with their local laws. The seller disclaims liability for international transactions in restricted jurisdictions.

IV. GOVERNING LAW & DISPUTE RESOLUTION

This disclaimer and all transactions shall be governed by the laws of [your state/country].

Disputes arising from the sale, interpretation, or use of these items shall be resolved through binding arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16).

Class action lawsuits are expressly waived under AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011). Arbitration shall be confidential and final.

The sale of these items does not violate any contract, consumer protection, or fraud laws when conducted in compliance with federal and state regulations.