Jack Daniel's Fetches Favorable Supreme Court Decision in Dog Toy Lawsuit

Despite its humorous likeness to a Jack Daniel's bottle, the whiskey brand took trademark squeaky toy seriously.

For nine long years, Jack Daniel’s has been engaged in a steadily escalating legal battle against VIP Products, an Arizona company that makes the “Silly Squeakers” line of dog toys. The company’s chewy toys parody the appearance of alcohol and soda packaging, turning Kendall Jackson wine into a plastic bottle of “Kennel Relaxin,” rebranding Bacardi into “Bark Party,” and making chewable soft cans of “Panta” soda.

Jack Daniel’s has never been impressed by VIP’s squeaky version of its Tennessee whisky, and filed a cease and desist in 2014, in the hopes that the company would stop making its “Bad Spaniels” toy, which replaces Jack Daniel’s familiar label with one that says “43% Poo by [Volume]” and “The Old No. 2, on your Tennessee Carpet.” VIP Products has consistently fought back, and this case has worked its way from lower courts to the Ninth Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court itself.

Related: An Entire Tennessee Town Is Covered in 'Whiskey Fungus'

On Thursday, the nine Justices ruled unanimously in favor of Jack Daniel’s, tossing the Ninth Court’s previous ruling that “Bad Spaniel’s” was a parody that should be protected by the First Amendment and that whole ‘right to free speech’ thing.

“This case is about dog toys and whiskey, two items seldom appearing in the same sentence,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her opinion. “[VIP Products’] jokes did not impress petitioner Jack Daniel’s Properties. It owns trademarks in the distinctive Jack Daniel’s bottle and in many of the words and graphics on the label. And it believed Bad Spaniels had both infringed and diluted those trademarks. Bad Spaniels had infringed the marks, the argument ran, by leading consumers to think that Jack Daniel’s had created, or was otherwise responsible for, the dog toy.”

(As a side note, Kagan didn’t seem to be totally impressed by Bad Spaniels either: “What is there to it? What is the parody here?” Kagan asked VIP Products’ attorney during oral arguments in March. “Because maybe I just have no sense of humor. But what’s the parody?”)

As reported by Reuters, although the Court noted that the decision was “narrow,” it ultimately decided in Jack Daniel’s favor, ruling that the Bad Spaniels toy was not an “expressive work” covered by VIP Products’ First Amendment rights. “[I]t is not appropriate when the accused infringer has used a trademark to designate the source of its own goods — in other words, has used a trademark as a trademark,” Kagan continued. “That kind of use falls within the heartland of trademark law, and does not receive special First Amendment protection."

Related: This Tennessee Distillery Is the Most Visited in the World

Representatives for both Jack Daniel’s and the Distilled Spirits Council both seemed pleased with the court’s decision. “While this case focused on silly dog toys, the issue of trademark infringement is very serious and this unanimous ruling is a big win for brand owners working hard to responsibly market their products,” Courtney Armour, the Distilled Spirits Council’s chief legal officer, told USA Today.

Jack Daniel’s spokesperson Svend Jansen said that the company would continue to protect its trademark. "Jack Daniel's is a brand recognized for quality and craftsmanship, and when friends around the world see the label, they know it stands for something they can count on,” he said.

Food & Wine has reached out to VIP Products for comment about the decision. Their “Mr. Poops” squeaky toy looks pretty sad today though. 

For more Food & Wine news, make sure to sign up for our newsletter!

Read the original article on Food & Wine.