![Print](print-icon.png)
![](Text_Increase_Icon.png)
![](Text_Decrease_Icon.png)
![Supreme_Court-Jack_Daniel's-Dog_Toy_53450--46ecc_1060741294.jpg](https://misc.pagesuite.com/9b1866d9-7ccc-4f4a-9a70-1f685d18da31/images/2350aa53-c70c-4b9e-ae5b-763cc66326a5.jpg)
WASHINGTON >> A dispute between Jack Daniel’s and the makers of a squeaking dog toy that mimics the whiskey’s signature bottle gave the Supreme Court a lot to chew on Wednesday.
The question for the court involves whether the toy’s maker infringed on Jack Daniel’s trademarks, and the justices were largely on their best behavior, not picking up on the toy’s poop humor and puns.
Still, with three of the justices either completely or almost totally silent, it wasn’t clear from the arguments whether Jack Daniel’s case is on the rocks or whether the makers of the Bad Spaniels toy had been, well, bad.
Justice Samuel Alito expressed skepticism for Jack Daniel’s arguments. “Could any reasonable person think that Jack Daniel’s had approved this use of the mark?” he asked at one point, suggesting the toy was an unmistakable parody and legally acceptable.
Arizona-based VIP Products has been selling its Bad Spaniels toy since 2014. It’s part of its Silly Squeakers line of chew toys that mimic liquor, beer, wine and soda bottles.