## Facts

- Jeff Foxworthy, a nationally known comedian, built a recurring joke format around the phrase “you might be a redneck if …” and commercially exploited it through recorded comedy, a joke calendar, and authorized merchandise including T-shirts.
- Foxworthy asserted trademark/service-mark rights in “you might be a redneck if …” for entertainment services and related merchandising, claiming the phrase identified him as the source.
- Custom Tees, Inc., and its principal, Stewart R. Friedman, manufactured and distributed T-shirts through retail outlets, including in Georgia.
- Foxworthy learned that shirts were being sold bearing exact or near-exact replications of his “redneck” jokes, sometimes with only minor reformatting.
- After Foxworthy complained, Custom Tees changed wording on some shirts from “you might be a redneck” to “you ain’t nothin’ but a redneck,” while keeping the same setup/punchline structure and often the same punchlines.
- Foxworthy sued alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition based on consumer confusion as to source, sponsorship, or approval and sought preliminary injunctive relief.

## Issues

1. Whether “you might be a redneck if …,” as used with Foxworthy’s entertainment services and merchandise, functioned as a protectable mark through distinctiveness and secondary meaning.
2. Whether Custom Tees’ reworded but structurally similar “redneck” phrases on T-shirts were likely to cause confusion as to source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement.
3. Whether the requirements for a preliminary injunction were satisfied (likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of harms, and public interest).

## Decision

- The court granted Foxworthy’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
- The court found Foxworthy demonstrated a protectable mark in “you might be a redneck if …” with secondary meaning tied to his persona and commercial use.
- The court found Custom Tees’ modified phrasing remained sufficiently similar in overall commercial impression to create a likelihood of consumer confusion.
- The court concluded Foxworthy established the equitable prerequisites for preliminary relief, including irreparable harm from loss of control over goodwill and consumer confusion.

## Legal Principles

- A catchphrase associated with a performer may be protectable as a trademark/service mark when, through commercial exploitation and public recognition, it acquires secondary meaning identifying a single source.
- Likelihood of confusion turns on overall commercial impression; cosmetic rewording does not avoid infringement when consumers may still perceive source, sponsorship, or approval by the mark owner.
- In preliminary injunction proceedings for trademark/unfair competition claims, a showing of likely confusion supports injunctive relief where harms to goodwill and consumer deception are difficult to quantify, the balance of equities favors the mark owner, and the public interest favors avoiding confusion.

## Conclusion

The court preliminarily enjoined Custom Tees from using Foxworthy’s “redneck” catchphrase and closely similar rewordings on T-shirts because the phrase functioned as a source-identifying mark with secondary meaning and defendants’ use was likely to confuse consumers about authorization or origin.


Foxworthy v. Custom Tees, Inc., 879 F. Supp. 1200 (N.D. Ga. 1995)