The US Supreme Court has declined to get involved in a capyright dogfight between Mexican fastfood chain Taco Bell and two Michigan men over a talking Chihuahua dog.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
The two men, Joseph Shields and Thomas Rinks, claim that advertisisng executives at the California-based tacos giant stole their idea for a cartoon Chihuahua spokesdog (called “psycho Chihuahua”) after they pitched it more than a year before the company began using the dog in commericals.
In 1997, Taco Bell aired commericals featuring a real Chihuahua who said in Spanish “Yo quiero Taco Bell” (I want Taco Bell). The company said it decided to use the dog after it was independently proposed by a larger advertising company.
The commerical, which has since been discontinued, was hugely popular – giving the company a huge market for spin-offs, such as soft toys and t-shirts.
Shields and Rinks sued Taco Bell in 1998, claiming that the company breached a verbal contract to use their dog. A federal judge dismissed the case in 1999 but Taco Bell, a subsidiary of restaurant giant Tricon Global Restaurants, appealed to the Supreme Court to throw out the copyright allegations after a federal appeals court reversed that decision in 2001 and reinstated the case.
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataThe Supreme Court offered no comment when it declined the case.
