Jack Daniel’s does not wish to be associated with this and demands a ban. VIP Products argues that this is a permissible form of parody. They state that since this is a creative expression, there is no dilution and no one will think there is a relationship with Jack Daniel’s. We shall wait and see how the U.S. Supreme Court rules on this, especially since this is an ordinary consumer item.
We have had similar cases in Europe. There, the parody defense has little chances of success. Often the verdict is that the sale of parody objects simply constitutes trademark infringement. (see Puma vs Pudel, Harry Potter vs Harry Popper condoms and iPod vs eiPott eggcup, among others).
