IP/Brand Protection

Subscribe to IP/Brand Protection via RSS

Though the news of Nike’s exclusive deal with the NFL broke some time ago, the agreement will officially go into full effect this month and the look of Monday Night Football is about to change. Replacing adidas, this will be the first time that Nike, who was a NFL supplier in the mid-nineties and has maintained individual deals with players, will exclusively supply all 32 teams. The deal, for which Nike reportedly paid $1.1 billion dollars, covers the entire player’s uniform including jerseys, belts, pants, socks and gloves.Continue Reading The National Football League Decides to “Just Do It”

By Tyler Baker

Luxury brand titan Louis Vuitton recently achieved a significant victory over counterfeiting of its designer products. In an action brought in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Louis Vuitton sued the Eisenhauer Road Flea Market, its owner, Bruce L. Gore, and its manager, Patricia D. Walker, for contributory trademark infringement, alleging that the defendants had failed to prevent vendors from selling fake Louis Vuitton goods at the flea market. See Louis Vuitton Malletier v. Eisenhauer Road Flea Market, Inc., No. SA-11-CA-124 (W.D. Tex.). Louis Vuitton stated that counterfeit “LV” products were abundant at the flea market and that Louis Vuitton had given Gore and Walker sufficient opportunities to discipline their vendors that engaged in phony sales. Louis Vuitton alleged, notwithstanding this notice, that Gore and Walker chose to be “willfully blind” to such infringing activity. Gore testified that he warned market tenants not to sell counterfeit goods, only to have those vendors nonetheless engage in distribution of bogus items after they said they would not.Continue Reading Louis Vuitton Achieves Genuine Victory Over Flea Market’s Phony Sales

By Shannon King

The multi-million dollar trademark and trade dress dispute between Italian fashion label Gucci and American designer Guess?, Inc. ("Guess?") marches on toward trial as Judge Shira Scheindlin of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York largely rejected Guess?’s motion for summary judgment to dismiss Gucci’s claims on February 14, 2012. The Court granted summary judgment and dismissed Gucci’s claims for monetary relief on the basis of federal trademark dilution as to two designs but left the majority of Gucci’s infringement claims untouched.Continue Reading Battle of the G’s Rages On: Gucci’s $124 Million Trademark and Trade Dress Infringement Lawsuit Against Guess? Withstands Summary Judgment

THE SITUATION IS ASKED NOT TO COVER HIS SITUATION WITH ABERCROMBIE ANYMORE

Abercrombie & Fitch issued a press release offering The Situation (of MTV’s The Jersey Shore fame) "substantial payment" to stop wearing Abercrombie’s clothes. The company’s main concern is brand dilution. The press release explains the company is worried that The Situation’s "association with our brand could cause significant damage to our image" and that this association "is contrary to the aspirational nature of our brand, and may be distressing to many of our fans." Whether this was a clever public relations strategy to generate publicity about the brand during the important back-to-school season or whether it is a legitimate branding issue that had something to do with the dip in Abercrombie’s stock following the press release remains unclear. What is clear, however, is that people are talking about it. Common wisdom is there may be no such thing as bad publicity; however, it cannot be ignored that Abercrombie’s stock fell sharply the day following the press release.
 Continue Reading REALITY BITES – Brand Protection, Reality TV Style

As we previously reported here, Christian Louboutin ("Louboutin") filed a lawsuit against Yves Saint Laurent ("YSL") in early April, alleging that YSL and its affiliated companies violated Louboutin’s red sole trademark by selling women’s shoes with red uppers and outsoles alleged to be virtually identical to Louboutin’s red sole trademarks.
 Continue Reading YSL Fights Back By Seeking To Cancel Louboutin’s Red Sole Trademark

Social media has become a part of everyday life. As Shakespeare has written: "This news is not old enough, yet it is every day news." The minutiae of every moment is narrated through status updates. Digital photographs are taken and instantaneously posted minute-by-minute on the Internet for the world to see. This lightning fast use of social media raises new and different intellectual property challenges which have not been previously addressed by courts. On January 14, 2011, the Southern District of New York addressed a particularly interesting copyright question raised by the use of Twitpic – a service that allows users to post pictures to the Twitter microblogging and social networking website. Agence France Presse v. Morel, 2011 WL 147718 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 14, 2011). 
 Continue Reading Tweet Me! – The Southern District of New York Answers Copyright Questions Raised By Twitter and Twitpic Use

"There’s an app for that.™” The fashion world, and indeed, the general consuming public, is well familiar with this phrase. The expression has become so ubiquitous that Apple has even successfully registered it for trademark protection. But what is the import for the fashion industry? What does "that" refer to, and what are its legal ramifications? What’s behind the simple swipe of a finger that allows consumers to sit front row at fashion shows around the world?
 Continue Reading This Season, Cover Your Apps

Online piracy and internet counterfeiting are unfortunate realities in our Information Age. On the Internet, a counterfeiter can sell consumers a pair of counterfeit Louboutins or a fake Hermes Birkin bag purchased with the simple click of a mouse. Other online pirates can sell consumers unauthorized copies of their favorite television show, movie, or music with impunity. In response to the onslaught of online counterfeiters, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) and senior Republican member Orrin Hatch (R-Ore) have introduced the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act ("COICA")(S. 3804)[1], a bipartisan bill that would give the Justice Department an expedited means to track and shut down unlawful domains devoted to the unauthorized downloading, streaming, and sale of copyrighted content and counterfeit goods. On November 18, 2010, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously voted in favor of COICA and sent the bill to the full Senate for consideration.
 Continue Reading The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (“COICA”) Moves to the Senate

High fashion eyewear company Revolution Eyewear, Inc., won a total victory in a patent infringement case filed against the company and its president, Gary Martin Zelman, by Aspex Eyewear, Inc. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida granted Revolution’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement of United States Patent RE 37,545 (‘545 patent) in Aspex Eyewear, Inc., et al. v. Marchon Eyewear, Inc., et al., No. 09-61515. The Court ruled that Aspex was legally barred from pursuing its patent infringement claims against Revolution’s bottom-mounting magnetic clip-on eyewear. The Court also granted summary judgment in favor of the other defendants, which sell bottom-mounting eyewear under a license from Revolution.
 Continue Reading Total Victory in Patent Infringement Case