News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Cease and Desist

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
ArentFox Schiff

Supreme Court Puts a Leash on Parody Defense in ‘BAD SPANIELS’ Trademark Infringement Case

ArentFox Schiff on

The US Supreme Court rejected First Amendment defenses raised by the maker of whiskey bottle-shaped dog chew toys branded BAD SPANIELS based on claims of trademark infringement and dilution of JACK DANIEL’S marks. ...more

WilmerHale

Supreme Court Miniseries: Zero Spoof Whiskey

WilmerHale on

In the Public Interest is excited to present a miniseries examining notable decisions recently issued by the United States Supreme Court. The first episode in the miniseries welcomes WilmerHale Partner Thomas Saunders, who...more

Weintraub Tobin

Podcast - The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Bad Spaniels in the Doghouse – Jack Daniels Prevails in Trademark Fight

Weintraub Tobin on

The U.S. Supreme Court provided clarification on the application of the Rogers test in relation to Jack Daniels v. VIP Products. Scott Hervey and Jamie Lincenberg talk about this ruling on this episode of The Briefing by the...more

Weintraub Tobin

The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Bad Spaniels in the Doghouse – Jack Daniels Prevails in Trademark Fight

Weintraub Tobin on

The U.S. Supreme Court provided clarification on the application of the Rogers test in relation to Jack Daniels v. VIP Products. Scott Hervey and Jamie Lincenberg talk about this ruling on this episode of The Briefing by the...more

Moritt Hock & Hamroff LLP

Supreme Court Limits The Parody Defense In Trademark Infringement Claims

Moritt Hock & Hamroff LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, vacated a decision by the Ninth Circuit that in effect barred trademark infringement and dilution claims against the use of a trademark that parodies the plaintiff’s trademark....more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Jack Daniels v. Bad Spaniels: Trademarks Triumphant Win Over The First Amendment Satirical Speech

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

Whether you operate a large e-commerce company on Amazon, a specialized artisan store on Shopify or Etsy, or a local t-shirt company, all brands producing products resembling famous marks should consider the implications of...more

AEON Law

Patent Poetry: Supreme Court Says First Amendment Doesn’t Protect Dog Toy

AEON Law on

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment doesn’t protect a chew toy for dogs designed to look like a bottle of Jack Daniel’s whiskey (shown above)....more

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

Jack Daniel’s v. VIP Products: Supreme Court Clarifies When Rogers Test Applies in Trademark Cases

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on

On June 8, 2023, the Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, No. 22-148 (U.S.). The decision left intact existing legal protections for the use of trademarks...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

In Jack Daniel’s case, Supreme Court Rejects Ninth Circuit’s Expansive View of First Amendment Rogers Test

Proskauer - Minding Your Business on

On June 8, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products, LLC and provided some clarity as to the applicability of the “Rogers test,” a doctrine that grapples with the...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Supreme Court’s Jack Daniel’s Decision Clarifies First Amendment Parody Defense in Trademark Infringement Cases

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On June 8, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products, LLC, a trademark case concerning the First Amendment parody defense. In a unanimous opinion...more

Bracewell LLP

Unanimous Supreme Court: Consumer Confusion Is Trademark Infringement Test, Even for Punny Parodies

Bracewell LLP on

It may be punny or even funny, but a unanimous Supreme Court has decided that the “Bad Spaniels” dog-toy brand may infringe and dilute the “Jack Daniel’s” trademark. Last week’s opinion puts an end to the toy maker’s...more

Holland & Hart LLP

Pity for Parody – SCOTUS Decision Sides with Jack Daniel's

Holland & Hart LLP on

Key Take-Aways - Infringers/diluters who are using another’s mark to identify the source of their own good or service cannot rely on Rogers (to shield from application of the likelihood of confusion factors) or “fair use”...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Supreme Court: Parody Not a Shield from Trademark Infringement

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on

In Jack Daniels Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, (slip. op. No. 22-148, June 8, 2023), the United States Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit, ruling that a “Bad Spaniels” dog toy designed to look like a Jack Daniels...more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Unanimously Sides with Jack Daniel’s in Dog Toy Trademark Dispute

Snell & Wilmer on

The Supreme Court issued its ruling yesterday in a trademark lawsuit between Jack Daniel’s and the seller of a dog toy resembling a bottle of Jack Daniel’s famous whiskey. In a unanimous decision, the Court reversed the...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Bad News for Bad Spaniels: SCOTUS Sides with Jack Daniel’s in Trademark Case

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

The Supreme Court unanimously sided with Jack Daniel’s in the much-anticipated trademark case pitting trademark protection against parodic products. However, SCOTUS did not reach a final conclusion on whether VIP Products’...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Supreme Court’s Jack Daniel’s Decision Clarifies that Traditional Trademark Use “Does Not Receive Special First Amendment...

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Humor matters, but it’s not the most important thing when considering a trademark infringement or dilution claim. In a decision with references to The Hangover Part II, Aqua’s song “Barbie Girl” (good luck not getting that...more

Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP

Client Alert: SCOTUS Decides in Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. v. VIP Products that Parody Products Can Constitute Trademark...

Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP on

On June 8, 2023, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that parody products that mimic the trademarks and trade dress of recognized brands can constitute trademark infringement, subject to the standard test of...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Judge Alsup Certifies Two Hot Button Issues on Standard for Pleading Willful Infringement for Interlocutory Appeal to the CAFC

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on

On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more

Wiley Rein LLP

Wiley Consumer Protection Download (January 24, 2022)

Wiley Rein LLP on

Welcome to Wiley’s update on recent developments and what’s next in consumer protection at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In this newsletter, we analyze recent regulatory...more

Weintraub Tobin

Dogs, Whiskey, And Intellectual Property: Need I Say More?

Weintraub Tobin on

Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. has petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States for certiorari following an unfavorable ruling from the Ninth Circuit in the matter of VIP Products LLC v. Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. In...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Corporate Investigations & White Collar Defense - October 2015

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

"Wherefore Art Thou Due Process?" Part III - Why it matters: It is time for another installment in our continuing "Wherefore Art Thou Due Process?" coverage into the ongoing constitutional challenges to the SEC's...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Entertainment and Media Litigation Update - October 2015

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

The "Dancing Baby" Case—Ninth Circuit Rules That "Fair Use" Must First Be Considered Before Sending Takedown Notices Under the DMCA - Why it matters: On September 14, 2015, the Ninth Circuit ruled in Lenz v. Universal...more

22 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide