Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart
Mini Article – Volume 23, Issue 6
Share on Social
Doggy Doo, Doggy Don’t: A Supreme Court Issue. (No, Really.)
When a Bad Spaniel leaves a doggy stain on a famous brand’s proverbial carpet, even the Supreme Court can have fun. Last week, in the case of Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, the Supreme Court heard arguments from the attorneys representing Jack Daniel’s and VIP Products. At issue is a dog toy sold under the name Bad Spaniels with poop-themed jokes all over the label in parody of—or trademark infringement of—Jack Daniel’s’s trademarks.
Jack Daniel’s isn’t the only brand that got its own Silly Squeakers dog toy. VIP Products sells a line of beverage-themed pet toys, including Mountain Drool, Smella Arpaw, and Heinie Sniffin, among many others. All of the dog toys resemble the beverage bottles and cans their names call to mind, in terms of shape, color scheme, and label details.
VIP Products contends that its dog toy is a parody of the Jack Daniel’s whiskey bottle. Parody is a well-established defense to a claim of copyright infringement. The copyright laws are intended to foster creativity and to encourage artistic expression. In the context of creative works and copyright law, parody enjoys strong First Amendment protections.
A claim of parody in the trademark context, like the “Bad Spaniels” use, faces an uphill battle because the allegedly infringing use of the trademark owner’s trademark, slogan, product design, and the like are in the context of a commercial use. The trademarks (or parody thereof) are being used in association with the sale of another company’s products. This is in contrast to noncommercial use of another’s trademark for parody, such as Andy Warhol’s famed painting of the Campbell’s soup cans that included use of the Campbell’s trademark.
Will consumers buy the dog toys because they believe they are made by or endorsed by Jack Daniel’s? Will they buy the dog toys because they like the humorous take on the Jack Daniel’s label? Does the Bad Spaniels dog toy harm the Jack Daniel’s brand, or will consumers see it as an obvious funny take on the Jack Daniel’s label? Even if consumers see the obvious joke, would they nonetheless perceive it as affiliated with or sponsored by Jack Daniel’s?
The arguments before the Supreme Court yielded many laughs. Will this translate to a successful defense of parody? That remains to be seen.
Michelle Visser is a partner of Fishman Stewart, with over 25 years of experience practicing trademark law with other members of the firm’s Trademark Group. Besides going on adventures with her husband Kent, she loves attending to her two dogs, which were her inspiration for today’s article (photographed below).
Published March 31, 2023
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
One of the most common challenges is whether AI should be free to train on data that is protected by copyright and owned by third parties without first obtaining permission.
The U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) recently published its latest report on AI and “copyrightability.” In short, the USCO considers only some AI-generated works to be sufficiently creative as to deserve copyright protection, and thus, registration.
Back in the 1940’s assignments by independent contractors could be permanent and irrevocable. Things changed in 1976, when Congress overhauled the Copyright Act.
Generally, copyright protects the specific expression of ideas, such as the arrangement and presentation of visual elements, but it does not protect general concepts or styles.
In the age of the internet, memes are a universal language. A meme is a piece of content, typically an image, video, text, or a combination of these, that spreads rapidly across the internet, often with humorous, relatable, or satirical undertones.
In the US, Thanksgiving is quickly approaching. For many, Thanksgiving and (American) football go hand-in-hand, with the Detroit Lions’ game as much a staple of the holiday as turkey and pie. However, this year’s game arrives amid controversy: Lions’ legendary Hall of Famer Barry Sanders is facing a lawsuit alleging copyright infringement.
After three years of litigation, a court has held that the “beat that goes on” for Cher’s right to continue receiving royalties on songs created during her marriage to Sonny Bono, despite attempts by Sonny’s widow, Mary Bono, to invoke federal copyright termination rights to end those payments.
Watching scary movies is a time-honored Halloween tradition, and one of the greatest movies to watch this time of year is “Ghostbusters” which premiered in 1984.
Halloween is coming up at the end of this month, and we are celebrating a little early with the spooky copyright story of Jap Herron!
In 2023, California artist Joe Morford lost his copyright infringement lawsuit against Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan. Morford claimed that Cattelan's viral artwork "Comedian," which features a banana duct-taped to a wall, was a copy of his own work, "Banana and Orange."
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
