Maker's Mark Distillery, Inc. v. Diageo North America, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that a lack of evidence of actual confusion “is rarely significant,” and upholding the district court’s finding that the lack of such evidence was non-determinative
• explaining that a lack of evidence of actual confusion “is rarely significant,” and upholding the district court’s finding that the lack of such evidence was non-determinative
• affirming district court’s conclusion that products only somewhat related despite district court’s finding that indeterminate number of defendants customers likely patronize plaintiff given drinkers’ habits
• noting, respectively, that purchasers of $3,000 guitars and $100 bottles of tequila likely exercise a high degree of care
• finding a likelihood of confusion where four Frisch factors favored the plaintiff, one factor favored the alleged infringing party, and the other three factors were neutral
• highlighting what the most important factors are in a likelihood of confusion analysis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).