I don’t fully follow this, but this seems to be the crux of the ruling: > The Rogers test is "not appropriate when the accused infringer has used a trademark t

I don’t fully follow this, but this seems to be the crux of the ruling: > The Rogers test is "not appropriate when the accused infringer has used a trademark to designate the source of its own goods - in other words, has used a trademark as a trademark," Justice Elena Kagan wrote. … > VIP had conceded that it used "Bad Spaniels" as a trademark. They then make a comparison to the song Barbie Girl (apparently also resulted in a lawsuit but with the opposite outcome), since that uses a trademark not as a trademark. This all seems to be about specifically whether the Rogers Test[0] applies, with brand confusion questions still requiring proof later (probably by a lower court): > The whiskey maker will still have to prove VIP's toys are likely to confuse potential customers into thinking it was affiliated with them in order to win its infringement case. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_v._Grimaldi https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_v._Grimaldi