Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart
Newsletter – Volume 26, Issue 19
Share on Social
Bad Spaniels Is Back, and This Time, It Bites Back
We wrote before about the “Bad Spaniels” dog toy parody of the famous Jack Daniel’s bottle, first when Michelle Visser previewed the case as a playful but serious Supreme Court fight over parody and trademark rights in Doggy Doo, Doggy Don’t: A Supreme Court Issue. (No, Really.), and again when Alex Johnson covered the Supreme Court’s decision that when a parody is used as a brand, it must be tested under ordinary trademark rules, including likelihood of confusion, in Supreme Court to VIP: Bad Spaniels, Bad.
The dispute involved a squeaky chew toy sold by VIP Products, evoking the look of a Jack Daniel’s bottle and label, branded “Bad Spaniels” instead of Jack Daniel’s, with dog-waste-themed riffs such as “The Old No. 2” instead of “Old No. 7,” “Old No. 2 on your Tennessee Carpet” as a riff on Tennessee whiskey, and label jokes like “43% poo by volume” and “100% smelly.”
But this squeaky-toy saga has now taken another turn. After the Supreme Court sent the case back, the district court found no likelihood of confusion, meaning consumers were unlikely to believe Jack Daniel’s made or sponsored the toy, but did find dilution by tarnishment and entered an injunction against VIP Products. VIP appealed, and on August 4, 2026, the Ninth Circuit reversed that ruling, vacated the injunction, and directed the district court to enter judgment for VIP on Jack Daniel’s dilution claim.
The Ninth Circuit held that Jack Daniel’s had not shown that the Bad Spaniels toy was likely to harm the reputation of its famous marks; association with the brand, even through dog-waste humor, was not enough. The toy’s obvious parody also mattered: consumers could recognize the joke without necessarily thinking less of Jack Daniel’s.
For brand owners, the lesson is not that parody always gets a free pass, but that dilution by tarnishment remains a demanding claim. A trademark owner must prove likely reputational harm to the specific famous mark at issue, not merely that the parody is crude, unwelcome, or built around a recognizable brand.
Whether Jack Daniel’s asks the Supreme Court to take another look remains to be seen. For now, the Ninth Circuit’s message is clear: dilution by tarnishment requires more than distaste, discomfort, or close association with a famous brand. Bad Spaniels may finally have the last bark.
Michael Fishman is a founding member of the firm and has over 30 years of experience in trademark law, related licensing and litigation and other disciplines of Intellectual Property law. His substantial experience covers a wide range of industries, including banking, insurance, automotive, packaged foods, contract furniture, publishing, sports, entertainment, building products, certification programs, computer hardware and software, telecommunications, restaurant, medical products, and scientific and laboratory products.
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
With the end of Hot Dog Season quickly approaching, now is a good time to reflect on the innovative new growth that made this season what it is today.
The Ninth Circuit just reversed course on Jack Daniel's dilution claim against the 'Bad Spaniels' dog toy, vacating the injunction and ruling that parody humor alone doesn't prove reputational harm. Here's what the decision means for brand owners pursuing tarnishment claims.
The trading card industry is booming again - and what makes this moment different is not who holds the cards, literally and figuratively, but how the trading card space is rapidly evolving.
Imagine paying millions of dollars for the naming rights to a stadium—only to have your brand hidden behind a giant white tarp. That’s exactly what happened to Levi Strauss during the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
As we celebrate our nation’s birthday on July 4th, many communities are replacing or supplementing traditional fireworks with drone-based light shows - which prompts the question of intellectual property protection.
The fun internet trend of promoting "dupes" has officially crossed the trademark line and everyday content creators are finding themselves in the crosshairs of multimillion-dollar corporate lawsuits.
The FIFA World Cup is global football (or soccer) at its highest level. It is, however, also one of the most carefully crafted displays of intellectual property (IP) in the world.
Trademark owners are often cast as villains when they send cease-and-desist letters. But in trademark law, failing to enforce rights can sometimes create bigger problems than enforcing them.
Women’s sports are having a moment, and not a small one. And right alongside that rise: the business of women’s sports is heating up, including some surprisingly dramatic trademark battles.
The idea that someone might “own” a piece of DNA raises a slightly uncomfortable question: can you really patent something that exists inside all of us?
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
