Jack Daniel’s harmed, but not infringed, by chewy dog toy

The latest ruling in ‘Bad Spaniels’ finds the whiskey brand’s marks were diluted—but not infringed by a dog toy parody, explain Brian Brokate and Jacqueline Alcantara of Gibney, Anthony & Flaherty.

Already registered?

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk

More on this story

Trademarks

Dogfight: SCOTUS favours big brands in JD’s First Amendment clash

9 June 2023 The Bad Spaniels case pitted the might of America Inc against a core principle of the US Constitution. Now that the country’s highest court has weighed in, what does this mean for brands?

Trademarks

SCOTUS picks at bones of Jack Daniel’s dog toy dispute

24 March 2023 Justices concerned that trademark claims potentially impair free expression | Marked reluctance to discard Rogers test | VIP Products and free speech advocates favour Rogers over likelihood-of-confusion analysis.

USPTO speeds up patent issuance amid widespread agency changes

Consulting firm adds economic analysts to its IP group

Nokia intensifies global patent fight with ITC complaint against Asus, Acer, and Hisense

Baker McKenzie strengthens litigation offering with new hire

WATCH: How to navigate the current Chinese IP prosecution and enforcement landscape

Ex-Tesla execs defeat trade secret claims in flexible circuit suit

EcoFactor v Google unlikely to result in ‘tectonic shifts in the law’

Sterne Kessler nabs ex-PTAB judge

Jack Daniel’s harmed, but not infringed, by chewy dog toy

More on this story

Editor's picks

Editor's picks

More articles