• Johnson & Johnson opposed registration of PISSTERINE for mouthwash, claiming confusion with LISTERINE
• Board rejected parody defense: 'parody is not a defense if the marks would otherwise be considered confusingly similar'
• LISTERINE deemed famous mark (in use since 1879) meriting broader protection scope

First, there is no parody defense in trademark law. That's something that comes up in fair use in copyright cases. In fact, parody necessarily means forming an association between two things in someone's mind so the goal of it is to actually get people thinking of two ideas at the same time.

And the likelihood of confusion test sometimes leads to weird situations like Johnson & Johnson arguing that consumers would definitely confuse piss in a bottle for their product. In practice? LMAO. No. Consumers would latch onto the joke. But in an unopposed TTAB proceeding PISSTERINE is not allowed to register.

Sorry PISSTERINE. Johnson & Johnson v. Pissterine, LLC, Opposition No. 91254670 (January 18, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Jyll Taylor).

Legalish is supported by Lynch LLP — Trademark · Copyright · Patents