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.

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.

How well do you really know your competitors?

Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.

Company Profile – free sample

Thank you!

Your download email will arrive shortly

Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample

We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form

By GlobalData
Visit our Privacy Policy for more information about our services, how we may use, process and share your personal data, including information of your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications. Our services are intended for corporate subscribers and you warrant that the email address submitted is your corporate email address.

The Supreme Court offered no comment when it declined the case.