The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

By all accounts, it’s been a bumpy week in the news.

The question of gay marriage clearly topped the charts with the president fighting his post hoc war of words against voters in the Tar Heel state. The CIA mobilized its double-agents to sniff out the next generation in underwear bombs. Meanwhile, in Damascus, Syria witnessed a steep uptick in violence, while a Russian commercial jetliner slammed into the side of an Indonesian volcano. At the polls, France broke left, and Greece broke bad. On the bright side, however, I’m very much looking forward to spending some old drachmas on my next trip ‘round the Aegean, because there’s no chance the Eurozone survives this latest mess.

Until then, I’ll have to lean on something a little closer to home to pass these troubled times. Although native to the Philadelphia ‘burbs, I’m a lifelong fan of Kentucky bluegrass and the commonwealth’s homegrown blends of corn-mashed bourbon. Sipping a dram of that charred-oak cocktail, smashed with mint and simple-syrup, is an annual treat when the three-year-olds Run for the Roses. This year, I’ll happily admit I didn’t lose any money, but a couple juleps cost me my cares.

So it was with great pleasure that I read this morning that the owners of Maker’s Mark, my go-to brand when it comes to the brown stuff (“On the rocks, splash of water, thank you.”), won a major victory at the Sixth Circuit US Court of Appeals. Judge Boyce Martin ruled that the iconic red wax seal, dripped on the Marker’s Mark bottle, is protected “trade dress,” and, as such, it’s shielded from imitation, duplication, copycats and clones.

As the Wall Street Journal’s Joe Palazzolo (big h/t) notes, Judge Martin clearly reveled in his historic defense of our native spirits and, frankly, the American way. His opinion opens:

Justice Hugo Black once wrote, “I was brought up to believe that Scotch whisky would need a tax preference to survive in competition with Kentucky bourbon.” While there may be some truth to Justice Black’s statement that paints Kentucky bourbon as such an economic force that its competitors need government protection or preference to compete with it, it does not mean a Kentucky bourbon distiller may not also avail itself of our laws to protect its assets. This brings us to the question before us today: whether the bourbon producer Maker’s Mark Distillery, Inc.’s registered trademark consisting of its signature trade dress element — a red dripping wax seal — is due protection, in the form of an injunction, from a similar trade dress element on Casa Cuervo, S.A. de C.V.’s Reserva de la Familiatequila bottles. We hold that it is. The judgments of the district court in this trademark infringement case are AFFIRMED. 

At question was the right of the Jose Cuervo family of spirits to sell its top-flight tequila in the States, sporting a seal that wept tears of wax — in the same fashion as the Maker’s Mark bottle. For the Samuels family of Loretto, KY — who’ve owned and operated the Kentucky distillery for centuries — the approximation proved too close for comfort. The Sixth District Court agreed.

So, today, amidst all that’s wrong in the world, here’s to our legal system, and a small victory for an American tradition over a foreign facsimile.

I think we can all drink to that.

View all comments (14) |

Kingofthenet| 5.10.12 @ 3:55PM

I supposedly as an Ambassador, have a 'Private' Barrel currently aging.

Kingofthenet| 5.10.12 @ 3:56PM

They send me updates from time to time on how it's doing, like i am sponsoring a kid overseas, i am beginning to grow fond of it.

Pete| 5.10.12 @ 4:21PM

Guess I kind of have to toast their victory with their product this evening. Darn.

Occam's Tool| 5.10.12 @ 4:26PM

I can see why one would grow fond of such an offspring, King. You know that any trouble it gets into is not of its own making, and, properly escorted and used, it can be quite an appropriate member of society.

The Community Mental Health Center that I worked for in Kentucky always used to give free tickets to the Derby each year for staff. Each year I turned mine down, as I had no interest in gambling, drinking, or horse racing. Well, my daughter adores horses completely, so I suppose one year when she is a bit older we will go.

Walt | 5.10.12 @ 4:54PM

Clink!

http://www.damndirtyrino.com/2.....y-victory/

Reid Smith| 5.10.12 @ 5:07PM

Cheers, Walt!

SpiralArchitect| 5.10.12 @ 7:57PM

Still have my sealed 18yr bottle of The Genlivet single malt that shall remain unopened until some time in November.

Then I shall drink lightly to the potential longevity of the Union & the strength of the people or to my dismay, get plowed in acknowledgement of impending end...

...election results pending which way the toast goes.

Ryan| 5.11.12 @ 8:35AM

Yeah, you're gonna need it one way or the other.

Bob K.| 5.11.12 @ 1:57AM

So, Maker's Mark distillery has been owned by the Samuels family "for centuries?"

And Old Crow was Senator Daniel Webster's (1782-1852) favorite bourbon.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1958-D.....0626901025

I wonder why he didn't drink Makers Mark bourbon?

Jose Cuervo goes back to 1795.

Bob K.| 5.11.12 @ 2:00AM

By the way, anybody who would drink a Mint Julip would drink a Pink Lady!

c. j. acworth| 5.11.12 @ 9:16AM

Knob Creek for me, straight up, no ice. Some day I'm going to go down there for the annual machine gun shoot.

Chris| 5.11.12 @ 10:16AM

Before they take our guns and bourbon; all we'll have left are our Bibles. Cheers

Powatomie Phil| 5.11.12 @ 10:13AM

Old Crow is straight rotgut!

Bob K.| 5.11.12 @ 2:18PM

There's good rotgut and rotgut! There ain't no bad rotgut!

More Blog Posts by Reid Smith

http://spectator.org/blog/2012/05/10/lets-raise-a-glass-to-makers-m

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT