Important information - .

The Texas Lottery Commission is two-stepping a vodka distillery to court. That s because it claims the copyright of the aforementioned is property of the state.

Texas LotteryThe Texas Lottery has run its popular Texas Two Step draw since 2001. But can a lottery product really be confused with a drink? And what do any of these things have to do with line dancing? (Image: Texas Lottery Commission)

Ali Ansari owns a “craft” vodka distillery outside . He decided to call his signature brand of vodka “Texas Two Step” after the much-loved dance and filed to trademark it with the US Patent and Trademark Office. The application was accepted.

The only problem was the Texas Lottery has offered a $1 draw ticket called “Texas Two Step” since 2001. And it believes Ansari is two-stepping on its toes.

The lottery owns the patent for the mark for gambling products. But it argues the vodka brand will cause confusion among consumers and damage its reputation by association.

Texas Hold’em Polka

In April, the Patent Office s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) determined that the two brands could happily co-exist without causing undue confusion. Now, the lottery commission is asking a US District Court in Austin to reverse that decision.

“Plaintiff has enormous goodwill in its ‘Texas Two Step’ mark,” claims the commission in its lawsuit. “As a state agency, Plaintiff must exercise caution in the advertising of its goods or services in order to protect the goodwill in the mark or make sure that the trust and confidence that the public has in Plaintiff and in its goods and services is not undermined.”

If Texas Two Step Vodka is allowed to proceed to registration, the Lottery argues, it is likely to “cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of Defendant or Defendant’s products with Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s products or services, and/or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of Defendant’s commercial activities.”

The Lottery says the association of its product with alcoholic beverages could “adversely impact” and “dilute” its brand. This could cause “irreparable damage,” including loss of revenue and sales and “tarnish Plaintiff’s mark and the goodwill therein in the minds of consumers.”

Who’s Tarnishing Whom?

But Ansari told The Houston Chronicle this week that the idea his distillery could taint the name of a gambling operation was ridiculous.

Our argument was, you’re in the gambling business, which mostly is illegal in Texas,” he said. “And we’re in the legal distilled spirits business. So, who’s tarnishing who?”

His lawyer, Steve Abbot, put it just as succinctly: “I have Delta faucets in my home. But I don’t get confused when I buy a Delta airline ticket,” he said.

Share this article

Former Las Vegas Club 662 Owner Suge Knight Faces 28 Years in Prison After Plea Deal Made Days Before Jury Trial to Begin in L.A.  Connecticut Slot Revenue Slides, Casino Win From Gaming Terminals Down $13.1M  Gaming and Leisure Properties May Sell as Much as $600M in Stock, Could be Used For Deals  Philippine Regulator PAGCOR Wants to Reopen High Stakes Tables to Fund Coronavirus Fight  Few Details Released on Circus Circus Las Vegas Rollercoaster Accident  CES Announces All-Digital 2021 Show, Largest Las Vegas Convention Powered Down  Casino Operator Enjoy Enters Brazil’s Online Gaming Marketplace  Ex-Las Vegas Raiders Player Henry Ruggs Gets New Judge for Fatal DUI Case  Macau Concessionaires Flirt with Credit Upgrades  Atlantic City Casinos Cheer Property Tax Cut, Claim It Protects Jobs, Provides Stability