Supreme Court Humors Itself as It Considers Whether Jack Daniel’s Can Stop a Dog Toy Company from Parodying Its Brand

Attorneys for popular whiskey distiller, Jack Daniel’s argued to the Supreme Court that a dog toy company infringed their trademark by trying to sell a “Bad Spaniels Silly Squeaker” toy that parodied its bottle.

Finnegan partner Mark Sommers told CNN that the case, “deals with a very common thing of pitting somebody who has trademark rights … against another who is saying, ‘I’m entitled to (use those marks) under the First Amendment because it is parody. And I need to take enough of the mark in order to make it funny. People have to get the joke.”

When speaking on the case’s importance, he said that the justices’ decision in the matter has the potential to be a landmark ruling if they “help define that line that exists between the First Amendment right of expression – be that parody, be that art, whatever you want to express – versus the important trademark issues that are here where brand owners who have invested a tremendous amount of goodwill don’t want their trademarks used in a manner which could result in potential confusion among the consuming public.”

Read “Supreme Court Humors Itself As It Considers Whether Jack Daniel’s Can Stop a Dog Toy Company From Parodying Its Brand”