Latest Applications to Protect Whiskey Bottle Trade Dress

[Barrel_Proof]

The latest application to protect trade dress in a whiskey bottle design in this one. The trade dress application was filed as an "Intent to Use" application by a distiller known to us all. For ready reference, call this "Design 2."

As long as the examiner assigned finds it distinctive enough to be capable of distinguishing the whiskey products coming from one whiskey source, it will be "Published for Opposition" and anyone (read, other distilling companies) can, then, oppose on one or more grounds. For example, a competitor could oppose on the basis that the design is confusingly similar to a trade dress that has become distinctive of its distilling company.

Any guesses which company filed this Intent to Use application?

[Barrel_Proof]

Here is the other bottle design for which this company has sought trade dress protection in recent weeks. It, too, was filed as an "Intent to Use" application. For ready reference, call this "Design 1."

Ain't this fun?

[Paradox]

Just a thought, but that bottle looks like a Gentleman Jack bottle to me...

[bobbyc]

design 2 looks like Old Charter and design 1 looks like Buffalo Trace, to me anyway.

[Paradox]

You're right Bobby, I do see BT and OC similarities in them. Good eye!

[Barrel_Proof]

And this is the third most recent whiskey bottle design over which trade dress protection has been sought with the USPTO.

This one, however, comes from another distilling company, though no less known to us all!!!

[TNbourbon]

Ditto Bobby. Of course, Old Charter is now a Buffalo Trace product, so we're talking about the same folks.

[TNbourbon]

That's Barton's infamous and nefarious '1792 Ridge(wood)mont 1792' -- or whatever the heck it is today.

[TNbourbon]

Seems just a little ironic, doesn't it, that after being found guilty of trademark violation with this brand, now they're seeking trademark protection for it?

I guess that's called learning from your mistakes.

[Barrel_Proof]

They are just capitalizing on the fact that the judge specifically ruled that the trade dress was NOT confusingly similar.

[angelshare]

Design #2 - This reminded me most of Dickel at first glance.

[cowdery]

That's an interesting one. Maybe EWSB or Buffalo Trace.

[clayton]

Design #1 (in the second post) looks exactly like the bottle of Ardbeg 10 (an Islay Scotch) on my shelf.

[dgonano]

Sure does look like Old Charter and Buffalo Trace. But aren't most of the bottles designed by third party outfits who sell similar packaging to various distillers.

[brendaj]

Cliff,

Great thread!

So...didn't Ridgewood Reserve have to go thru this 'Intent to Use' process in the beginning of their brand as well? Or, did they somehow by-pass this step? Seems to me that this is the stage to raise your hand, if you have a problem with the competition...

"Published for Opposition" and anyone (read, other distilling companies) can, then, oppose on one or more grounds

Did BF have an opportunity to review the RR bottle beforehand?

Bj

[cowdery]

Distillers use "off the shelf" bottles for the most part, but sometimes commission exclusive, proprietary bottle designs.

[LeNell]

Regarding Design #2, at first glance I thought of OGD but the OGD bottles don't have that scalloping at the bottom, just on top, just like Old Taylor. The Gentleman Jack bottle has this design, but seems a bit shorter & squatter than this drawing.

[LeNell]

Design #1 has got to be BT.

[boone]

Cliff,

It's the Barton Brands LTD. 1792 bottle .

I know I have the right answer. I am one of the lucky winners

Now where's my prize

Bettye Jo

[boone]

Here a pic of our EWSB bottle. It kinda looks like the drawing, but the bottom is different.

Bettye Jo

[cowdery]

It's not nice to tease the collectors with a picture of the impossible-to-find 1986 vintage.

[LeNell]

Impossible unless you are vacationing with Cliff in the islands!

[Barrel_Proof]

Here is the other bottle design for which this company has sought trade dress protection in recent weeks. It, too, was filed as an "Intent to Use" application. For ready reference, call this "Design 1."

Ain't this fun?

Well, gang, I erred. In my haste to post these latest applications to obtain whiskey bottle trade dress protection, I stated that the application to register Design 1 was filed as on an "Intent to Use" basis. In fact, it was filed based on actual use in commerce, which was stated to have first been on June 10, 1999.

[OneCubeOnly]

Pretty close:

[Barrel_Proof]

Close, indeed, but since the application was based on actual use, why not apply for the one and same bottle design actually used?

The Buffalo Trace bottle in use does, indeed, vary --albeit slightly-- from the drawing submitted by Sazerac to the USPTO.

Did Sazerac bottle another whiskey in a bottle more similar to the drawing? Does that explain the variance? I suspect not. I bet the drawing submitted to the USPTO was the one presented to the bottle manufacturer, but that the BT bottle ultimately produced and used in commerce differed, as illustrated in the previous post.

Ain't this fun?