Array
A Supreme Court debate Wednesday over parody and popular commercial brands was dominated by talk of whiskey bottles, dog toys, pornography and poop.
For nearly two hours, in an argument punctuated by laughter, the justices wrestled with the intersection of freedom of speech and protection for trademarks in a case pitting a humorous dog toy maker against American whiskey producer Jack Daniel’s.
The case, Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc., v. VIP Products, centers on a chew toy that resembles a bottle of Jack Daniel’s whiskey but is spoofed as «Bad Spaniels» with the suggestion that its contents are pet waste.MORE: Supreme Court to hear case between Jack Daniel’s and dog toy maker
«This case involves a dog toy that copies Jack Daniel’s trademark and trade dress and associates its whiskey with dog poop,» the whiskey maker’s attorney Lisa Blatt told the court on Wednesday.
The liquor company claims the toy’s design causes confusion and dilutes the quality of its brand. VIP Products insists the spoof is obvious and protected by the First Amendment.
«They’re complaining about the speech, the parody, the comparison to dog poop and a Bad Spaniel, not the mark,» VIP Products attorney Bennett Cooper said Wednesday. «Parodies on noncompetitive goods like Bad Spaniels aren’t likely to cause confusion.
