Whiskey conglomerate Jack Daniel’s Property, Inc has filed a dispute towards the canine toy maker VIP Products LLC for making a toy parody of its signature whiskey bottle. The firm has even efficiently pushed the U.S. Supreme Court to listen to their dispute, which they agreed to on Monday.

SCOTUSblog shared the news in a Twitter put up, writing that the nation’s highest courtroom had agreed to listen to the dispute between Jack Daniel’s and the toy producer, including, “The case will have implications for the tension between parody and intellectual property.”

The dispute is an important case for trademark legislation and infringement in line with different main corporations together with the makers of Campbell Soup, Patagonia, and Levi Strauss. However, attorneys for VIP Products stated in courtroom paperwork that Jack Daniel’s can’t take a joke and the corporate had “waged war” towards them for “having the temerity to produce a pun-filled parody.”

The toy portrays a parody model of the whiskey model and label by writing “The Old No. 2 on Your Tennessee Carpet.” The authentic Jack Daniel’s label says “Old No. 7 brand” and “Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey.” Additionally, the whiskey bottle notates it has 40 % alcohol per quantity, whereas the toy says, “43 percent Poo by Vol.” and “100% smelly.” It retails for $13 to $20 and notes on the entrance of the package deal, “This product is not affiliated with Jack Daniel Distillery.”

Jack Daniel’s lead legal professional, Lisa Blatt, stated in the court filing, “To be sure, everyone likes a good joke. But VIP’s profit-motivated ‘joke’ confuses consumers by taking advantage of Jack Daniel’s hard-earned goodwill.” She argued {that a} determination in favor of VIP Properties would supply “near-blanket protection” towards trademark infringement.

VIP Products legal professional Ben Cooper stated they’d hoped the dispute would have been resolved in the Ninth Circuit however believes this will likely be a “good test case” for different parodies.

Cooper instructed Gizmodo in a telephone interview that he hopes the Supreme Court will rule of their favor and “in favor of parodies generally,” and added that this case may present readability for manufacturers and would “hopefully avoid a lot of litigation” sooner or later. He stated Jack Daniel’s “has not wanted to let this go” and argued that their determination to raise the case to the Supreme Court reveals “there’s no room for anyone to have a parody from someone else’s trademark.”

Jack Daniel’s Property didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark.

In courtroom filings, Jack Daniel’s stated permitting VIP Products to proceed promoting the canine toy “threatens to supercharge” advertiser’s aggressiveness utilizing model logos. They argue it might negatively influence younger kids who can’t differentiate between the toy and the alcohol. “Children have been hospitalized after eating marijuana-infused candy and foods sold in packaging that mimics well-known brands,” Jack Daniel’s argued, citing Double Stuf Stoneos that mimicked Nestle’s Double Stuf Oreos.

However, VIP Products LLC wrote in their court filing response that the First Amendment protects them when invoking parody and negated Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc declare that it’s “likely to cause confusion,” saying the corporate must show they “explicitly misled consumers or that its use of Jack Daniel’s marks was not artistically relevant.”

The toy is a component of VIP Products’ Silly Squeakers line that mimics liquor, beer, wine, and soda manufacturers. The parodies embrace Mountain Drool (Mountain Dew), Heini Sniff’n (Heineken), and so they previously offered ButtWiper, (Budweiser) however had been barred from promoting it after a courtroom dispute in 2008.

The case is predicted to go earlier than the Supreme Court in early 2023 and a determination may come down earlier than the justices break for Summer recess.