While fashion lovers throughout the European Union will surely be familiar with the pattern, the General Court held that luxury fashion house Louis Vuitton failed to demonstrate that its trademark checkerboard ‘Damier Azur’ pattern, had acquired distinctiveness through use throughout the European Union.
The global fashion marketplace is experiencing unprecedented digital transformation with the emergence of the metaverse and NFTs. Given implementation is still in its early stages, fashion brands have closely watched the Hermès vs. Rothschild “MetaBirkins” dispute as a case that has the power to help define the future boundaries for what constitutes trademark infringement in the metaverse.
Summary: In a recent “Law.com” article titled “Too Big to Succeed: Lessons from the Ye / Adidas Brand Partnership,” Crowell attorneys discuss the unraveling of Ye (Kanye) West’s brand partnerships; particularly with Adidas. In the article, they explore Ye’s partnership deal, how the deal was likely terminated, and what brands need to know to manage
In recent news it was reported that Ikea, a globally well-known furniture company, sent a cease and desist letter to the gaming studio Ziggy following the announced release by the latter of a video game called “The store is closed”. The video game is still in development, but it has been characterized as a survival horror game set in an Ikea-like furniture store called “STYR”. The idea of the video game is to explore, craft weapons, build fortifications and try to survive the night in the furniture store.
Although the video game is unreleased, Ikea discovered that the gaming studio Ziggy was raising funds through a Kickstarter campaign. In total Ziggy was able to already raise several tens of thousands of dollars in a short period of time. From its discovery, Ikea immediately sent a cease and desist letter demanding certain changes as the “game uses a blue and yellow sign with a Scandinavian name on the store, a blue box-like building, yellow vertical stiped shirts identical to those worn by IKEA personnel, a gray path on the floor, furniture that looks like IKEA furniture, and product signage that looks like IKEA signage. All the foregoing immediately suggest that the game takes place in an IKEA store”.
Continue Reading Ikea’s Battle Against Horror Games: The Importance of Intellectual Property Rights
In the past several years, the market for counterfeit goods has grown rampantly. Estimates of the total value of counterfeit goods sold each year range from $1.7 trillion to $4.5 trillion. Makers of luxury goods are among the hardest-hit industries, as well as those dealing in footwear, apparel, fine art, and collectables. The rise of online shopping has further thwarted companies’ ability to protect their brands. Illegitimate sellers on e-commerce marketplaces employ techniques like posting fake positive reviews and using copyrighted branding to reach consumers and sell counterfeit goods.
On November 21, 2022 the U.S. Supreme Court agreed—after passing on the issue once before—to hear Jack Daniel’s (JDPI) challenge to the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in VIP Prods. LLC v. Jack Daniel’s Props, where the Ninth Circuit affirmed without opinion the district court’s grant of summary judgment to VIP and the dismissal of JDPI’s trademark infringement claim,[1] on the grounds that JDPI could not satisfy either prong of the Rogers test. The Rogers test balances free expression under the First Amendment against the trademark protections of the Lanham Act. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on the questions of whether parody uses of another’s mark receive First Amendment protection from liability under the Lanham Act and whether parody is exempt from claims of dilution by tarnishment under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(3)(C). The decision could clarify the balance between trademark and the First Amendment, an issue that has long-confounded practitioners.
Allegations of trademark infringement against celebrity-founded brands are not new. In 2015, resort-wear brand Island Company LLC sued Kendall and Kylie Jenner for use of the phrase “Run Away, Fall in Love, Never Return,” which resembled Island Company’s trademark phrase “Quit Your Job, Buy a Ticket, Get A Tan, Fall In Love, Never Return”.[1] The case was settled in January 2016. In 2021, an Italian tribunal ordered social media influencer Chiara Ferragni to pull her snow boots from her footwear line, finding infringement on Tecnica group’s trademark for the world-renowned Moonboot.[2] Now, Vans, Inc., a sneaker company born out of 1960s California counter-culture, alleges trademark infringement by MSCHF, a Brooklyn art collective endorsed by rapper Tyga.
In a recent Law360 article titled, “Penn State TM Case’s Impact On Merchandising And Beyond,” Crowell attorneys Cheryl Howard and David Ervin discuss the broader industry ramifications of Pennsylvania State University’s lawsuit against Vintage Brand LLC and the favored outcome for Vintage Brand. In the case, Pennsylvania State University filed a lawsuit for trademark infringement against
In the recent article, “Why Hermès’ MetaBirkins Lawsuit Has High Stakes for Brands and Creators”, featured in The Business of Fashion, Partner Preetha Chakrabarti expands upon her insights from the her previous blog posts on non-fungible tokens (“NFTs”) and the metaverse. Previously, Chakrabarti reported on how the designer, Hermès, sued an individual named Mason
Earlier this year, Hermès filed a trademark infringement suit against Los Angeles-based designer Mason Rothschild for creating and selling faux-fur digital renditions of the luxury Hermès Birkin handbags and using a collection of 100 NFTs, titled “MetaBirkins,” to authenticate the digital images.[1] In response, Rothschild filed a motion to dismiss Hermès’ trademark infringement claim under the Rogers test on the basis that the digital images of the Birkin bags are “art” and, therefore, receive First Amendment protection.[2] Hermès opposed, arguing that the Polaroid factors— instead of the Rogers test—should apply, to assess likelihood of confusion.[3] On May 18, 2022, the court denied Rothschild’s motion to dismiss, concluding that: (1) the Rogers test applies to the trademark infringement analysis of the “MetaBirkins” title, and (2) the Polaroid factors apply to the explicit misleadingness analysis.[4]
Continue Reading In the bag (for now): Hermès survives motion to dismiss in MetaBirkin NFT lawsuit