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
The US Copyright Office recently made headlines for partially revoking a copyright registration it previously issued for an AI-generated graphic novel. Artist Kristina Kashtanova used the Midjourney platform to create images that she included in her graphic novel called Zarya of the Dawn.
Ed Sheeran recently successfully defended against a copyright infringement lawsuit over his 2014 hit “Thinking Out Loud.” Songwriter Ed Townsend’s heirs brought the suit alleging Sheeran had infringed Townsend’s copyrights in the 1973 Motown classic, “Let’s Get It On” which Townsend co-authored with Marvin Gaye.
American publishing houses consistently snapped up the works of the famous British author, re-published them in cheap editions, which sold all over the country, and they pocketed the proceeds without any remuneration to Charles Dickens.
For many of us, the term “Easter egg” conjures up memories of dying hard-boiled eggs in bright colors or hunting for treasures and candies stuffed inside plastic orbs hidden around the neighborhood.
Each of us is creative. The key is to leverage that creativity, converting it into an intellectual property asset that enhances enterprise value.
This practice is often called the “Poor Man’s Copyright” and the idea has been around for a long time. The theory is that mailing a copy of a work to yourself will provide you with certain legal rights akin to a copyright registration so long as the envelope remains sealed and bears a postmark by the United States Postal Service.
Public Domain Day is celebrated on January 1st and commemorates the expiration of copyright protection for certain creative works. US copyright law provides the copyright owner with certain exclusive rights for a limited time, after which the works fall into the public domain.
Unlike the Matrix, Star Wars, and Austin Powers, respectively, Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer, or ChatGPT, is not a robot in disguise or a bot of science fiction. We, the users, provide prompts in text form, and ChatGPT converses in response to the prompts.
Recently, we filed an application to register the copyright for Finny the Fish. In the United States, and in many other countries, copyright protection arises at the moment a work is fixed in tangible medium. So, why would we take the extra step to register Finny’s copyright?
With the 2022 midterms (almost) in the rearview mirror, political junkies are now free to turn their full attention to the 2024 presidential election. Today’s focus is on the tug of war that can occur when candidates play music at campaign events.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
