USMC MARPAT Camouflage Legal Issues

[Egiam]

I am a geek about military equipment, particularly the history of camouflage/uniforms. I have had this question for a while that has been bugging me. It's not a particularly important question. It seems that everyone I ask has different answers.

What are the laws surrounding the public ownership of MARPAT MCCUU (Marine Disruptive Pattern/Marine Corps Combat Utility Uniform)? I don't really plan to purchase any, or anything, but this question is driving me crazy.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/MARPAT_woodland_pattern.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ed/1stMarineDivision_ChangeofCommand_May2007.JPG/400px-1stMarineDivision_ChangeofCommand_May2007.JPG

What I do know:
Three companies have ownership of the rights to the MARPAT:

Helmet Covers, Boonies, and Patrol caps are made exclusively by Sekri Industries. They do not sell to the public.

Uniforms are made by American Apparel, and Propper International. Propper sells a "Civilian Version", that is very similar, except a few differences:
-Real Deal fatigues have a tag designating it as being made exclusively for the USMC.
-The fabric is dotted with little green emblems of the Corps.
-A few say that the replica is made with a different material.

Some say that it is illegal, and yet several businesses on the web retail the uniforms. And yes, they are the real deal.


Can any of you enlighten me?

[Deth Muncher]

Things, stuff and more things.

Hrm. I wish I could help. I can tell you I live near a military base, and managed to pick up an American Apparel trench (with staff sgt. tags still attached, oddly enough), so I PRESUME decommissioned gear is acceptable?

[arguskos]

Hrm. I wish I could help. I can tell you I live near a military base, and managed to pick up an American Apparel trench (with staff sgt. tags still attached, oddly enough), so I PRESUME decommissioned gear is acceptable?
As far as I am aware, decom gear is sold with express permission from the military. Not sure about retailers just selling the pattern, but if the military hasn't prevented it yet, then I have this feeling it's legit.

[RS14]

Camouflage patterns are generally copyrighted, aren't they?

[CDR_Doom]

The only time you could run yourself into real trouble is if you try to wear the uniform with insignia. The military generally frowns on people impersonating a soldier(officer or enlisted), which is what you are doing if you wear the full uniform with the insignia on it.

[Deth Muncher]

The only time you could run yourself into real trouble is if you try to wear the uniform with insignia. The military generally frowns on people impersonating a soldier(officer or enlisted), which is what you are doing if you wear the full uniform with the insignia on it.

On that note, I should probably leave the staff sergeant tags off of my coat, then?

[wxdruid]

Army surplus stores sell uniform items to the general public. The only thing you might run into with that is the Marine Corps hasn't been using that pattern for very long (relatively speaking).

A brief search online shows several varieties of camo available although I haven't seen the Marine Corps camo version yet.


As for the SSgt stripes, yes, it would probably be wise to remove them.

[Deth Muncher]

As for the SSgt stripes, yes, it would probably be wise to remove them.

Okay. I did a little while after I got the jacket, since I hadn't even noticed them until a guy on my floor in my dorm who went to a military academy saw them and recognized them. I'm gonna hang onto them for Steampunking purposes, but not for every-day wear.

[skywalker]

Camouflage patterns are generally copyrighted, aren't they?

Yes, but in the same way that you can display a licensed copy of a movie poster in your room, so too can you wear a copyrighted camo pattern.


On that note, I should probably leave the staff sergeant tags off of my coat, then?

Unless you're planning on wearing it with uniform pants, a hat or a helmet, and some boots, I don't think it's too big a deal. It's not the wearing that's prohibited, it's the impersonation of a soldier/sailor/airman/marine. Which you are not doing. You're almost certainly fine wearing them around and about. I see people with stripes on their shoulders all the time.

But, if you were planning on going to any military bases, then removing them would be a good idea.

[Foeofthelance]

On that note, I should probably leave the staff sergeant tags off of my coat, then?

The stripes are fine. It would be running around in full kit with all the shiny buttons, pins, badges, and name tags that go with those bars that would get you into trouble. Even then, most people wouldn't care unless you started introducing yourself as Sgt. Deth Muncher. You especially don't need to worry about it being an older coat, as I know plenty of kids running around with their grandparent's service jacket but couldn't tell me the difference between the P-51 Mustang and a B-17 Flying Fortress.

[Force]

I run around campus with my old (woodland pattern) coat frequently. It's got name & service bars on it, as well as the flag, but no rank or unit patches. Know several ROTC people (including one of the COs) who haven't said a word about it, so...

[Cyrion]

As long as it's clear you're not impersonating a soldier, you should be fine, and you don't have anything but the jacket.

As was said above, avoid the rest of the regalia. Technically, it's a federal offense in the US to impersonate a soldier, and there have been a couple of high profile cases of the military going after people lately, including someone at a costume party. Granted, the guy at the costume party was introducing himself as a general (as I recall), and was at a high profile party rather than just something in the neighborhood, so he's just an eedjit and his troubles are kind of a "stupid tax."

[Egiam]

I'm not sure that my question is being understood. I generally understand the laws/unwritten customs surrounding the public wearing of the old USMC Battle Dress Uniforms:
http://wardsurvival.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/woodland_bdu3.jpg
This can be public sold/worn. I live in a semi-rural area heavily populated with hunters. I see non-military people wearing this stuff all the time. However, it is NOT legal to use it to impersonate a member of the armed services/


My question was about MARPAT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARPAT):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/USMC_M249_SAW_PIP.jpg/220px-USMC_M249_SAW_PIP.jpg


According to some, there is a patent on the MARPAT camouflage pattern, making it illegal to retail to the general public. My question is, is it legal for a surplus store to sell the uniforms? Is there anyone who lives near a MC base that would know this?

[Deth Muncher]

I'm not sure that my question is being understood. I generally understand the laws/unwritten customs surrounding the public wearing of the old USMC Battle Dress Uniforms:


Sorry, that was my bust for derailing your thread. :/

EDIT: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARPAT) has something to say on the subject, and it's even got a citation!

[Jack Squat]

I'm not a laywer, and I don't have any sources, but this is how I understand it.

Selling/buying non-decommissioned gear == illegal.

However, Marines are allowed to keep some stuff after they get out, including their uniforms (which they buy), and they can indeed sell them. So yes, the stuff you're seeing in surplus stores is legal.

However, if you're worried about it, just buy the clone patterns, which won't have the logo on it.