Posted on 02/18/2023 11:50:40 AM PST by CFW
The Supreme Court returns next week to hear oral arguments on issues ranging from the regulation of Big Tech to President Biden's student loan handout to the Jack Daniel's trademark.
The case involving the famous whiskey brand, which will be heard on March 22, involves a battle that pits First Amendment rights against trademark protections. The case arises from a lawsuit brought by Jack Daniel's against VIP Products LLC for marketing and selling spoof dog toys that look like the famous whiskey bottle
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
and
"Later this month, the nine justices will also decide on two expedited appeals over the Biden administration's effort to provide debt relief to student-loan borrowers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic."
In most of these cases, I expect the Maltese Falcon Roberts to vote with our side.
The SC is corrupt, just like the DOJ,FBI, ATF, IRS, DHS, TREASURY Dept. And others
For social media, if they are deleting posts and putting “context/fact checks” on posts they should be held liable for people’s posts. And for deleting posts.
You mean the Maltese Chickenhawk Roberts?
“The SC is corrupt, just like the DOJ,FBI, ATF, IRS, DHS, TREASURY Dept. And others”
The big challenge would be list the agencies that are not corrupt - and get that list larger than two or three words - if that many.
This is no longer a laughing matter. When the majority no longer respects the government, “consent of the governed” obviously becomes as true as a CNN broadcast.
I haven’t had any respect whatsoever for the Supreme Court since they handed down Roe v Wade. Why should I? Why should anyone?
And before arguments are even heard the draft rulings will be leaked to the NYT.
Nope...don’t think “Jack Daniels” has a case. No violations of copyright there.
Maybe because they reversed it?
“Maybe because they reversed it? “
A tactical retreat, nothing more. The effrontery and sheer stupidity of the decision forced them. They fear the deepstate as far as I’m concerned.
Jack Daniel's absolutely has a case. They're "policing their mark" to prevent someone from devaluing it. Jack Daniel's trademark isn't just on the whiskey but also on t-shirts, hats, glasses, keychains, etc. and here is a separate entity making a product with an intentionally similar logo.
Jack Daniel's absolutely has a case. They're "policing their mark"
Where is the line drawn? I immediately thought of North Face suing South Butt for copyright infringement, and Harley-Davidson's attempt to copyright their distinctive engine sound, to ban Japanese imitations.
Both failed, because neither was an exact copy of the original, I suppose. It's the same situation here.
JMHO
Looks like Biden’s next two years is going to be the Gong Show.
Where’s the case that stops people from being fired or cancelled for their own personal free speech or views?
Where’s the case that stops people from being fired or cancelled for their own personal free speech or views?
I see zero elements in the dog toy that are identical to a Jack Daniels bottle. Copyright requires actually copying something. Apple vs. Microsoft settled the notion that you could copy a “look and feel” in general and infringe copyright. You cannot. You can take anything to a court...winning the case requires objective facts in evidence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.