![]() ![]() ![]() When the company’s lawyer pushed back on the justice’s knowledge about dog toys, Alito responded in part with: “I had a dog. “Could any reasonable person think that Jack Daniel’s had approved this use of the mark?” he asked at one point, suggesting the toy was an unmistakable parody and legally acceptable. Justice Samuel Alito expressed skepticism for Jack Daniel’s arguments. Still, with three of the justices either completely or almost totally silent, it wasn’t clear from the arguments whether Jack Daniel’s case is on the rocks or whether the makers of the Bad Spaniels toy had been, well, bad. The question for the court involves whether the toy’s maker infringed on Jack Daniel’s trademarks, and the justices were largely on their best behavior, not picking up on the toy’s poop humor and puns. WASHINGTON (AP) - A dispute between Jack Daniel’s and the makers of a squeaking dog toy that mimics the whiskey’s signature bottle gave the Supreme Court a lot to chew on Wednesday. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |