Brizzy sued Vizzy, and the judge said no preliminizzy injunction.
Oh no. Terrible. I'll show myself out. 1/
Oh no. Terrible. I'll show myself out. 1/
Oh heaven help me these marketers need to stop.
Law, the discipline where you have to write a paragraph to explain why the nonsense word Brizzy does not tell you anything about the product.
I feel like if you want to argue Brizzy is not related to fizzy, you should not have a slogan about how you should "follow the fizz"
So the notion is you might say you wanted a Brizzy in a bar and they give you a Vizzy? I sense an entire Seinfeld episode here.
Maybe I'm projecting, but I feel like the Court is only barely keeping it together about the prospect of people constantly ordering Brizzy (or Vizzy) in a crowded bar (which of course doesn't even exist now)
Excellent lawyers on both sides as well. Must have been an interesting case to litigate.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
