## Facts

- The Coca-Cola Company owned federally registered “Coca-Cola” trademarks, including registrations that were incontestable, and used a distinctive stylized script and red-and-white advertising format.
- Gemini Rising, Inc. created, printed, and commercially sold a poster that closely replicated Coca-Cola’s trademark and trade dress, substituting “ine” for “-Cola” so it read “Enjoy Cocaine.”
- The poster duplicated the stylized “Coca” script, color scheme, layout, and overall format associated with Coca-Cola advertising.
- Gemini sold more than 100,000 copies nationwide and characterized the poster as parody or satire, not intended to confuse consumers about source.
- Coca-Cola alleged the poster would cause consumers to associate the use with Coca-Cola and would harm Coca-Cola’s goodwill by linking its brand to an illegal narcotic.
- Coca-Cola sought a preliminary injunction to stop further printing, distribution, and sales pending final judgment; Gemini raised defenses including lack of confusion, First Amendment, copyright, and laches based on an approximately 15-month delay.

## Issues

1. Whether the poster’s close imitation of Coca-Cola’s trademark and trade dress, altered to read “Enjoy Cocaine,” created a sufficient likelihood of confusion or mistaken association as to sponsorship, authorization, or approval under trademark and unfair competition law.
2. Whether use of Coca-Cola’s famous mark in connection with “cocaine” was likely to tarnish Coca-Cola’s goodwill and cause irreparable harm warranting preliminary injunctive relief.
3. Whether Gemini’s asserted parody/satire and First Amendment interests barred injunctive relief against commercial sale using Coca-Cola’s mark and trade dress.
4. Whether Gemini’s copyright in the poster immunized it from trademark-based injunctive relief.
5. Whether Coca-Cola’s delay in suing barred preliminary relief under laches.

## Decision

- The court granted Coca-Cola’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
- Gemini was enjoined from further printing, distributing, or selling the “Enjoy Cocaine” poster pending final determination.
- The court found Coca-Cola showed a strong likelihood of success on the merits based on the fame and distinctiveness of its mark and the poster’s near-verbatim replication of its format.
- The court concluded the poster presented a substantial risk of confusion or mistaken association as to sponsorship or approval and threatened harm to Coca-Cola’s business reputation by linking its mark to an illegal drug.
- The court rejected, at the preliminary-injunction stage, defenses based on parody/First Amendment, copyright, lack of confusion, and laches.

## Legal Principles

- A famous, distinctive mark and trade dress with secondary meaning receives broad protection against unauthorized uses that are likely to cause confusion or mistaken association, including confusion as to sponsorship or approval.
- Trademark injury includes likely harm to goodwill and business reputation from an unauthorized association, and such harm may be treated as irreparable for preliminary-injunction purposes.
- Parody or satirical content does not categorically excuse commercial appropriation of another’s mark and trade dress where the use risks confusion/association and reputational harm; the message may be conveyed without copying the mark.
- Copyright protection in a work does not authorize infringement of another’s trademark; trademark and copyright protections operate independently.
- Laches does not bar preliminary relief where the plaintiff’s delay is reasonably explained (including efforts to resolve the dispute) and the defendant continues the challenged conduct.

## Conclusion

The court preliminarily enjoined commercial sale of a poster that replicated Coca-Cola’s trademark and trade dress to read “Enjoy Cocaine,” holding Coca-Cola likely to succeed on claims based on confusion or mistaken association and reputational harm from tarnishment, and finding Gemini’s parody, copyright, and laches defenses insufficient to defeat injunctive relief at that stage.


Coca-Cola Co. v. Gemini Rising, Inc., 346 F. Supp. 1183 (E.D.N.Y. 1972)