Jack Daniel's trademark case versus dog toy goes to the Supreme Court in US

Jack Daniel’s, a well-known brand of Tennessee whiskey produced by the Jack Daniel Distillery, has gone to the Supreme Court in the United States for its trademark complaints against a dog toy and accessory company.

According to Reuters, the Supreme Court heard arguments for Jack Daniel’s trademark case on Wednesday this week. This is said to be a closely watched duel between the whiskey maker and dog toy firm that makes chew toys that bear a resemblance to the distiller's popular black-label whiskey bottle.

At the hearing, it was said that some of the judges threw in sharp questions about Jack Daniel’s request for them to drop a longstanding legal test that hatches the possibility of an early off-ramp from an expensive legal process when spoof items get trademark infringement ultimatums.

Jack Daniel's is owned by Brown-Forman Corp., and this legal spat sets the brand’s trademark rights against legal protections for creative expression. In this dispute, the cause involves VIP Products LLC’s dog toy featuring Jack Daniel's Old No. 7 Tennessee whiskey bottle. The dog accessory company changed the label to "the Old No. 2, on your Tennessee Carpet,” which apparently a parody of Jack Daniel’s whiskey.

It was mentioned that the Supreme Court is hearing the arguments about whether VIP Products should be protected from any liability for alleged damage that its chew toy may do to Jack Daniel's as there is a possibility for customers to be misled. They argued that shoppers might associate the chew toy with Jack Daniel’s, which may lead to harming its trademark.

In any case, Business Inquirer reported that some business groups expressed support for Jack Daniel’s in this case. They said the clash holds extensive stakes for corporate America’s capacity of protecting its brands and reputations.

“This case is no laughing matter,” Distilled Spirits Council’s chief legal officer, Courtney Armour, said in a statement. “While the case involves dog toys, even allegedly ‘humorous’ knock-offs can confuse consumers as to what messaging and products well-known alcohol beverage brands endorse.”

On the other hand, there are also groups that do not agree with Jack Daniel’s. They said that if the whiskey maker wins, the result may lead to a “catastrophic chilling effect” as the creative expression may also trigger litigation.

Photo by: Alex Perez/Unsplash