The Supreme Court is hearing a Jack Daniel’s dispute against the maker of parody dog ​​toys

The maker of Jack Daniel's whiskey has filed a dispute against dog toy maker VIP Products LLC

picture: Stephen Love too (Getty Images)

Whiskey giant Jack Daniel’s Property, Inc. has filed a dispute against dog toy maker VIP Products LLC for making a parody toy for her signature whiskey bottle The company even succeeded in that pay us Supreme Court to hear their dispute that they are agreed on Monday.

Scotus Blog Share the news In a post on Twitter, he writes that the nation’s top court He agreed to hear the dispute between Jack Daniel’s and the Toy Factory, adding, “The case will have ramifications for the tension between parody and intellectual property.”

disagreement important issue of trademark and infringement law pursuant to other major companies including the makers of Campbell Soup, Patagonia, and Levi Strauss. but, lawyers for VIP products He said in court documents Jack Daniel’s can’t take a joke and company “wage war” against them “for having the audacity to produce wordy parodies.”

The game depicts a parody version of the whiskey brand by writing “The Old No. 2 on Your Tennessee Carpet”. The original Jack Daniel’s label says “Old No. 7 Brand” and “Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey.” Additionally, the whiskey bottle states it has 40 percent alcohol per volume, while the game says, “43 percent poo by volume.” and “100% stinks.” It retails for between $13 and $20 and notes on the front of the package, “This product is not affiliated with Jack Daniel Distillery.”

said Lisa Platt, Jack Daniel’s lead attorney Court filing, “Sure, everyone loves a good joke. But the profit-inducing VIP ‘prank’ confuses consumers by capitalizing on Jack Daniel’s hard-earned goodwill.” It said the decision in favor of VIP Properties would provide “near-comprehensive protection” against trademark infringement.

Ben Cooper, a VIP Products attorney, said they hope the dispute will be resolved the Ninth Circle but believes this would be a “good test case” for the other parody.

Cooper told Gizmodo in a phone interview that He hopes the Supreme Court will rule in their favor and “in favor of parody in general,” and added that this case could provide clarity for trademarks and “hopefully avoid a lot of litigation” in the future. He said that Jack Daniel “didn’t want to let this go” and argued that their decision to take the case to the Supreme Court showed “there’s no place for anyone to have a parody of someone else’s trademark”.

Jack Daniel’s estate did not immediately return to A.J Comment request.

In court filings, Jack Daniel’s said that allowing VIP Products to continue selling the dog toy “risked increasing” advertiser aggressiveness using the brand’s trademarks. They argue that it can negatively affect young children who cannot differentiate between a game and alcohol. “Children were hospitalized after eating marijuana-infused candy and foods sold in packages that mimic well-known brands,” argued Jack Daniel, quoting Double Stuf Stoneos that mimic Nestle’s Double Stuf Oreos.

However, VIP Products LLC wrote in Their response to the court filing that First Amendment protects them when Invoking parody and denials of Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc claims it “has the potential to cause confusion,” saying the company needs to prove that it “outright misled consumers or that its use of Jack Daniel’s marks was not technically relevant.”

The game is part From a VIP products’ Silly Squash line that imitates brands of liquor, beer, wine and soda. Parodies include Mountain Drool (Mountain Dew), Heini Sniff’n (Heineken), a previoButtWiper, (Budweiser), was sold but banned from sale after a court dispute in 2008.

The case is expected to go before the Supreme Court in early 2023 a Resolution can come before the judges break to Summer Holiday.

#Supreme #Court #hearing #Jack #Daniels #dispute #maker #parody #dog #toys

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *