Has a link been posted to the order? I'd like to read it. If the matter was based on the likelihood of confusion by potential buyers of Woodford Reserve, with due deference to the judge who rendered the decision, I do not agree with it. I was wondering if the decision might have been based on other, or additional, grounds, e.g., copyright violation, breach of confidentiality, or something other than mere marketplace confusion. No doubt the test for confusion pertains to the casual buyer and is one of overall impression, but still..