The US Supreme Court has dominated in favour of Jack Daniel's in a trademark dispute with a canine toy firm's toilet-themed product resembling the signature whiskey bottle.

A decrease court docket had dominated in favour of VIP Products in 2020, which argued that its "Bad Spaniels Silly Squeaker" dog toy used Jack Daniel's model "to convey a humorous message" and the toy was an "expressive work" and had not tainted the model.

However, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the ruling.

"It is not appropriate when the accused infringer... has used a trademark as a trademark," Justice Elena Kagan mentioned when saying the ruling.

"[This] does receive special first amendment protection."

Justice Kagan mentioned the decrease court docket had made a mistake with the "expressive work" argument and, going ahead, the case would deal with whether or not "the Bad Spaniel marks are likely to cause confusion" for shoppers.

"This case is about dog toys and whiskey, two items seldom appearing in the same sentence," she added.

'The Old No. 2' in your carpet

VIP Products has been promoting its Bad Spaniels toy since 2014 and has since added to its personal Silly Squeakers line of chew toys which mimic liquor, beer, wine and soda bottles, together with "Mountain Drool" - a parody of Mountain Dew - and "Heini Sniff'n" - resembling Heineken beer.

Its most noticeable parody but is its "Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey" toy, which incorporates the wording: "The Old No. 2 on Your Tennessee Carpet."

The Jack Daniel's bottles have the phrases: "Old No. 7 brand" and "Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey".

The authentic bottle notes it's 40% alcohol by quantity and the parody incorporates a canine's face and says it's "43% Poo by Vol." and "100% Smelly".

Read extra on Sky News:Analysis: The case against Trump will rock the USUnexpected symptoms of poor air quality revealed as smoke blankets parts of US

The toy, which sells for round $20 (£16.23), additionally notes in small font: "This product is not affiliated with Jack Daniel Distillery," on its packaging.

Jack Daniel's legal professionals argued that the toy misleads clients, earnings "from Jack Daniel's hard-earned goodwill" and associates its "whiskey with excrement".

The Supreme Court didn't resolve whether or not VIP had violated trademark regulation however as an alternative despatched the case again for additional assessment.