Plus One

Showing posts with label trademark. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trademark. Show all posts

Thursday, 11 February 2016

Burberry Sues JCPenney Over Check Pattern

Pic: JCPenney
JCPenney under the cosh again as Tuesday when luxury apparel maker Burberry filed suit against the retailer for trademark infringement reported BrandChannel. Burberry claims JCPenney is selling outerwear that features the “famous Burberry check” pattern that mimics its signature look too closely.

The particular objects that drew Burberry’s ire are scarves sold with matching coats. In addition, Burberry is upset that JCPenney continued selling the pieces for months after the former informed the latter of the issue, Reuters reports

“Even though defendants’ infringing products are of inferior quality, they appear superficially similar to genuine Burberry products,” Burberry said, according to the wire service. “Defendants’ actions are intended to deceive and mislead consumers into believing that defendants’ or their products are authorized, sponsored by or connected to Burberry.”

Burberry took another swing at JCPenney in the filing by calling its clothing “substandard,” the New York Post reports. 

What’s not mentioned in Burberry’s suit: the period in which the iconic British brand ditched its familiar check after it became associated with working-class Brits who caused such trouble that some bars wouldn’t allow anyone sporting Burberry plaid in the door, Marketplace observed.


But that was then. Now, Burberry would like JCPenney to shell out for the alleged infringement. The apparel maker is asking for triple damages, any profit, or up to $2 million for each trademark that has been infringed.

Content thanks: BrandChannel


✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

RELATED ARTICLES

Tuesday, 9 February 2016

Coca-Cola Trademark Battle to Trademark ‘Zero’ Continues

Coca-Cola

COCA-COLA has been trying to trademark the word “zero” for the best part of 13 years and last month, Canada rejected Coca-Cola Company’s attempt to trademark the rights to the common English word for its diet drink brands—including Coca-Cola Zero, Sprite Zero and Powerade Zero.  The major brand leader will reportedly get the news on whether it has won or not later this year.

If Coca-Cola is given the rights, it can then sue imitators that have used the word, the Wall Street Journal reports. The first rival Coke would likely go after is Dr Pepper’s Diet Rite Pure Zero.

Losing the case, however, would allow other companies to start using “zero” in their product names.
You may remember, the battle for “zero” started when Dr Pepper challenged Coke’s trademark application, noting that there were then 32 other beverages not owned by Coke that used the term “zero,” such as Monster Energy Zero Ultra, Virgil’s Zero and Arnold Palmer Zero, Fortune reports. PepsiCo also got in on the fight, and UK and Canadian regulators ruled against Coca-Cola. 

Now it is America’s turn.

Coca-Cola main argument, appears to centre around the fact that “zero” is associated with its company because of “extensive advertising, promotion and sales.” Coke would love to have the rights to help push its Coke Zero more aggressively. In its latest earnings report issued Tuesday, the company reported a growth of 6 percent for Coke Zero across the globe while Diet Coke and Coke Light dropped by 6 percent.

The outcome may well set a legal trademark precedent no doubt for future disputes, will keep you posted.

» For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller

RELATED ARTICLES

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Saturday, 16 January 2016

YSL Settles Ain't Laurent Lawsuit


YVES SAINT LAURENT has settled its lawsuit against parody T-shirt company What About Yves. The French house took exception to the production of merchandise bearing the words "Ain't Laurent Without Yves" in reaction to creative director Hedi Slimane's decision to rebrand the company without the founder's forename, asserting that the items were guilty of "trademark infringement, trademark dilution, false designation of origin, and unfair competition".

What About Yves. You may recall that YSL filed suit against the company and its founder, Jeanine Heller, this past April for manufacturing and selling t-shirts and sweatshirts that read, Ain’t Laurent Without Yves. The Paris-based company, which dropped the “Yves” from the name of its revamped ready-to-wear collection in 2012 when creative director Hedi Slimane came on board, alleged claims of trademark infringement, trademark dilution, false designation of origin, and unfair competition.

Things got interesting when after YSL sent Heller a number of letters alerting her of such intellectual property charges. According to YSL’s complaint, which was filed in the Southern District of New York court, after a number of letters that YSL sent Heller on the matter went unanswered, Heller finally reached out to the design house's counsel, denied any wrongdoing, and offered to sell her Ain't Laurent Without Yves trademark to them. (Yes, Heller filed to federally register the mark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office but was ultimately rejected due to its similarity to a number of existing trademarks belonging to YSL). All the while, Heller continued to sell the allegedly infringing t-shirts to retailers including famed Paris boutique, Colette, with which YSL ultimately cut ties as a result of its stocking of the t-shirt.

After settling a similar lawsuit with Chanel this past year (even though the shirts at issue
in that case are still available for sale on the What About Yves website), Heller settled the case with YSL earlier this month. According to the docket for the Southern District of New York court, the case was voluntarily dismissed on January 12th, and while it appears that Heller agreed to remove the YSL tees, there is no word on what the monetary component of the settlement is as reported by The Fashion Law.


YSL has been bombarded with complaints from dissatisfied fans after unveiling the new Saint Laurent Paris logo on Facebook earlier this week. The brand shared a photo of a box bearing the new logo on their official page - which, despite receiving almost 3,000 Likes so far, has attracted a slew of negative comments.

"Hard to believe such a poor decision has been made, which can only damage the brand," says Chris Dickman, while Molly McGlew adds: "This is so boring and genuinely disappointing."

"Go back to the old logo, the new one lacks imagination," comments Adi Elias. "I'm not a fan of the new logo, but I can see what the brand was aiming for," adds  Lucy Geremin. "But I really do think the Yves or Y was quite important and iconic. The new logo doesn't represent the same brand to me."

But not everyone shares the same view: "What Hedi proposes is both new and old, looking forward but with respect for the old," comments Nick Byrne. "YSL and the full name in the same script were only used for Haute Couture. The ready-to-wear used the same typeface which Hedi has proposed."


"Very fresh, modern, contemporary... of the moment," adds Ian Edwards. "It speaks of an austere, inconspicuous, but highly elegant luxury."

Heller has had a busy year in litigation, after Chanel took issue with a double C-printed T-shirt that she was selling - a case that was also settled out of court. She currently still retails the double C print - along with parodies of the Dior, Hermès and LVMH logos - so it's unlikely that this is the last time we'll hear her name in connection with trademark-infringement accusations.

The settlement comes at a time when the fashion industry is debating the future of Yves Saint Laurent creative director Slimane, despite repeated assertions by the brand that he is going nowhere. The designer is said to have personally objected to the What About Yves pieces so strongly that he chose to withdraw the entire Saint Laurent collection from Parisian boutique Colette in 2013, simply because it also carried the parody sweaters.



✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

RELATED ARTICLES
» Chanel And "parody" Streetwear Brand in Trademark Suit
» Louis Vuitton Files Suit in Connection with Counterfeit Goods on Alibaba
» Chanel Brand Sues Entrepreneur in Trademark Violation


Wednesday, 13 January 2016

Luxury Group Kering sues Alibaba for helping Counterfeiters


Makers of expensive bags, clothes and watches are fighting fakery in the courts. But the battle seems to be getting tougher


THE grand golden doors of 500 Pearl Street, in Manhattan, have welcomed such glamorous names as Hermès, Tiffany & Co and Kering, a French conglomerate whose treasures include Gucci and Bottega Veneta. The building is not a posh hotel or department store. It is the federal court for the Southern District of New York, a favoured battleground for the decidedly unglamorous war against counterfeit goods. As reported by the business section of the economist (August 2015)
The court is now the venue for Kering’s suit against Alibaba, a Chinese e-commerce giant. Kering alleges that Alibaba helps fakers sell goods on its websites. The French firm is not the only one to be incensed. On July 17th the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) demanded that Alibaba crack down on counterfeits. Alibaba insists it has extensive measures in place to do just that. It is trying to distance itself from counterfeiters, who are also accused by Kering. On August 6th Alibaba plans to argue to the court that it risks being unfairly implicated as a co-conspirator. A bitter trial looks likely.

The fight against copycats has been long and arduous. Kering’s suit is the industry’s most important in a decade—Alibaba has more than 1 billion product listings and aspires to reach consumers around the world. But its sites are hardly the only places shoppers can find copies. Fake sales are proliferating online, with counterfeiters becoming more technologically adept, more difficult to track and harder to pursue in court.
Counterfeit sales are, by definition, difficult to tally. Last year American border officials nabbed copies that, had they been genuine, would have been worth $1.2 billion. Their European Union counterparts seized €768m ($1 billion) of fakes in 2013. But these were surely a fraction of the counterfeits being peddled. Estimates for the total value of fakes sold worldwide each year go as high as $1.8 trillion.

The deluge of fakes includes everything from software and medicine to detergent and car parts. On July 26th, for example, Chinese authorities said police had raided a factory turning out huge quantities of iPhone copies. Nevertheless, watches, bags, clothing, jewellery and perfume make up most of the goods seized at borders (see chart). On July 21st the European Commission reported that lost sales due to fake clothes and accessories amounted to 10% of the industry’s revenue in Europe. This makes luxury firms shudder. They cherish their reputations for quality and exclusivity, explains Antonio Achille of the Boston Consulting Group. Ubiquitous, flimsy copies undermine them.

Economist.com

The problem has grown more complex as the fakery business has moved online. America’s trade representative predicted in April that online sales of pirated goods might exceed those in physical markets, adding glumly: “Enforcement authorities, unfortunately, face difficulties in responding to this trend.” Online, counterfeiters can stay anonymous, reach across borders and constantly launch new websites to evade legal action. Governments have a devilish time tracking fakes sold online and delivered by post, explains Armando Branchini of Altagamma, the trade group for Italian luxury firms. Fakes shipped in bulk, destined to be sold in physical shops, are hard enough for border guards to spot. “But when it’s a matter of millions of parcels, each with a pair of shoes or bag or shirt,” Mr Branchini sighs, “it’s quite impossible to check.”

Since it is so difficult to fight both fake-goods websites and the counterfeiting operations behind them—if you shut one factory, another will crop up nearby—luxury-goods firms are increasingly taking aim at the legitimate firms that facilitate the business of counterfeiters, such as auction websites, internet-domain registries and payment processors. Sometimes brand-owners seek these firms’ co-operation in court. Sometimes they sue them.

This has had mixed success. In 2004 Tiffany claimed that eBay was liable for the counterfeit sales on its site. eBay retorted that it could not prevent every illicit post, though it would work to remove them. Courts agreed. eBay and Google, which has also been the target of lawsuits, have systems to fight dubious sellers and advertisers. Neither, however, is foolproof.

Alibaba and the forty fakers

According to Kering’s lawsuit, Alibaba poses a new challenge. On eBay, a counterfeiter might auction one or two handbags at a time. Kering alleges that one wholesaler on Alibaba required a minimum purchase of 500 fake Gucci watches and claimed it could deliver up to 8m each month. Brand-owners tremble at the spectre of Alibaba’s 8.5m sellers hawking masses of counterfeits both within China and around the world. Kering’s investigators, for example, bought fake Gucci sneakers on Alibaba’s Taobao.com and had them shipped to New York. Kering alleges that Alibaba not only provides a platform for these sales, but encourages them. Kering complains that if you type “replica” in the search bar in Alibaba.com, the site’s algorithm will suggest “wristwatches”.

Alibaba counters that it, too, is a victim of counterfeiters and is working to fight them. The company has more than 2,000 staff devoted to the problem. They pore over dodgy listings flagged up by Alibaba’s algorithms and by brand-owners. In the run-up to its public offering last year, the firm removed 90m listings. Indeed Alibaba has acquired some weighty partners—it has signed agreements with Louis Vuitton, Coach and others to co-operate on fighting counterfeits. But its disputes look likely to heat up. The AAFA wants Alibaba to set up an automated system to take down dubious listings immediately, a demand that is unlikely to be met. The fight with Kering will continue. The two parties have already tried and failed to reach agreement outside court.

Meanwhile sales of counterfeits continue to sprawl across the internet. For example, it is common for Chinese consumers to dodge the high price of luxury goods in their own country by buying them on so-called daigou websites: a shopper might buy a handbag in Europe, then resell it on one of these websites for more than the European retail price but less than the Chinese one. Many products on such sites are genuine. Many are not.

More pervasive are the sites that pose as legitimate sellers of discounted goods. They may have domain names registered in one country, servers in another, payment-processing elsewhere and shipping from yet another place, according to MarkMonitor, which helps companies protect their brands online. Roxanne Elings, a lawyer at Davis Wright Tremaine, says one counterfeit outfit may run as many as 14,000 websites.

Firms have had some success in battling these sites, again by focusing their attention on legitimate companies that serve them. In 2010 Ms Elings helped North Face and Polo Ralph Lauren obtain court orders for domain registries to take down networks of rogue sites, and for PayPal to turn over fakers’ assets. Tory Burch, Hermès and Michael Kors won similar cases in 2011 and 2012.
Since then, however, counterfeiters have become more slippery. Ms Elings says that networks of sites are using multiple registries and myriad fake names. Joseph Gioconda, a lawyer who has represented Hermès, Michael Kors and Lululemon, says that catching up with copycats is daunting when their assets are held outside America. Kering and Tiffany had sought to freeze counterfeiters’ accounts at Chinese banks, but last year an American court refused to do so. That will make it harder to obtain foreign records that might expose counterfeit rings.

The role of consumers in all this is complex. Some are looking for the real thing at discount prices, and are deceived. Others are knowingly hunting for fakes. Both types may regret their penny-pinching. The most troubling recent trend is that online counterfeiters have discovered a new source of revenue. Some of their sites have no goods to sell, real or fake. They are simply out to steal unwitting shoppers’ card details, a business that can enjoy higher margins than any handbag.


Friday, 8 January 2016

Surge in Counterfeit via Luxury Consignment Websites

Luxury Consignments websites swelling the sale of fakes

DELORTAE AGENCY is the UK's first and leading luxury authentication and appraisal specialists and last year charted the biggest rise in counterfeit and fake luxury goods from consignment websites and looks to continue throughout 2016.

As consumers use the internet in search of a luxury handbag or accessory, the rise in consignment websites have increased to a prolific rate.

Many of the luxury brand handbags and accessories we examine are counterfeit, said Taelin Lambert Assistant to Delortae Agency Luxury Chief Authentication and Appraisal specialist.

Many are being purchased by UK consumers from consignment websites in both Europe and USA that claim the items they sell are from sellers that use their websites.

This upsurge is causing a huge problem for the UK luxury consumers who attempt to get their money back from these companies who hide behind the distance between the purchaser and the seller.

On the fake items we examine, Mr Lambert went on to say, "are not even the more sophisticated types and clearly are not the quality and sometimes even the design of the brand purported".

Many of these web sites claim to have 'in house authenticators' that will examine the item prior to being dispatched to the buyer by the seller. 

But the truth is, many are not checking the items as claimed because the consignment sites are allowing the items to be dispatched by the seller directly.

Delortae Agency, who is known and respected by major brands due to consistent commitment to brand protection world-wide, believe UK consumers are being targeted and often buyers do not even receive the items listed on the site but something of far less quality by using old style 'bait and switch' techniques.

Delortae Agency have been inundated by request from purchasers, not only from the UK, to appraise these fake items, and are appalled at the excuses buyers are facing when challenging these sites to get their money refunded.

There is no doubt that counterfeiters are using these consignment sites, who distance themselves from the consumer by stating that their members are listing the goods and have to confirm their authenticity, therefore absolving themselves from responsibility.

The 'Money Back Guarantee' is worthless as the consignment websites refuse to accept the item is counterfeit. 

So what can the consumer do? Having forked out a small fortune to purchase the item and additional shipping if they suspect they have bought a fake? We advise you try the following and then if only all else fails, consult a professional to assist with authentication as a last resort, try to avoid any additional charges, as companies will have a fee but you may be able to claim this back against the seller.

- If there is a 'Money Back Guarantee' get it confirmed in writing that it is 'no quibble' and the time for a refund is from when you receive the product and not from dispatch.

- Approach the website and request a refund in the first instance if you suspect the item is fake.

- If met with a refusal, remember you have the law on your side, and buy with supported third party payment merchant or Credit Card for additional buyer protection.

- Get your item professionally appraised and evidence confirmed in writing

This is a growing online problem from last year that we suspect will only increase throughout 2016.



✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

RELATED ARTICLES
» YSL Settles Ain't Laurent Lawsuit
» Chanel Brand Sues Entrepreneur in Trademark Violation
» Chanel And "parody" Streetwear Brand in Trademark Suit


Monday, 9 November 2015

Taylor Swift Settles "Lucky 13" Lawsuit, Avoiding Trial

Taylor Swift

The singer strikes a deal to end the trademark dispute right as she was scheduled to submit to a deposition reports The Hollywood Reporter.

Taylor Swift has put to end to an uncomfortable legal difficulty with a confidential settlement executed with Blue Sphere, an Orange County-based clothing company that accused the singer of infringing its "Lucky 13" trademarks.

The lawsuit against Swift was filed in May 2014 as Delortae Agency reported here Taylor Swift Sued by Lucky 13 Apparel Company for Trademark Infringementafter she allegedly began marketing clothing bearing the "Lucky 13" phrase and made a partnership with a greeting card company conducting a "Lucky 13" sweepstakes.

In recent months, the litigation had evolved from a ho-hum trademark case into one that delved into many aspects of Swift's business acumen and had the prospect of becoming embarrassing ahead of a trial that was scheduled for January.

In particular, Blue Sphere and Swift went several rounds over whether she'd have to submit to a deposition. Swift claimed "harassment" as well as a busy tour schedule with the plaintiff investigating endorsement deals and serving subpoenas on Elizabeth Arden, Coca-Cola Company, Proctor & Gamble, Toyota Motor Sales and Papa John's, among others.

Her agents at William Morris Endeavor handed over its documents pertaining to Swift while attorneys for Blue Sphere continued to hunt for such items like all photographs and videos of Swift in which her buttocks or breasts were at least partially visible. The effort was made in part to figure out how products were being named, what other products might have been contemplated, and whether there were searches of trademark records in conjunction with all this. Additionally, Blue Sphere looked to investigate Swift's control over her brand and understanding of marketing channels.

In August, a judge cleared the way for a deposition, though the two sides continued to fight over timing.

Those looking for a better understanding of why Swift filed registrations on such marks as "this sick beat" or how hands-on she has been in her business won't learn anything more in the case. On Friday, the parties told a judge of the settlement agreement resolving all claims. 

Swift was represented by J. Douglas Baldridge at Venable while Blue Sphere was handled by Gary Rinkerman at Drinker Biddle & Reath.

✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller


RELATED ARTICLES
» Taylor Swift Sued by Lucky 13 Apparel Company for Trademark Infringement 
» Stella McCartney sues Steve Madden Over Handbag Rip Off
» Skechers Sues Steve Madden For 'Go Walk' Patent Infringement 

Wednesday, 14 October 2015

Chanel And "parody" Streetwear Brand in Trademark Suit



Parody Street Wear



CHANEL is unimpressed with a T-shirt depicting its famous double C logo as the Ghostbusters sign, so much so that it is taking legal action against the garment's makers. Jeanine Heller, the founder of "parody" streetwear brand






What About Yves - made famous for its "Aint Laurent Without Yves" merchandise - has been served with a trademark infringement suit by Chanel.

Filed last week in New York, the suit asserts that Heller is "displaying, offering for sale, and selling on her website, and selling to third-party retailers, a T-shirt and a sweatshirt bearing Chanel's CC monogram mark with an image of an animated ghost commonly associated with the motion picture Ghostbusters," The Fashion Law reports.

The company says that, far from "transforming the mark", which is a standard defence for parody products, Heller is using the "clearly recognisable CC monogram mark [on] her own clothing precisely because of the iconic status of the mark, with knowledge of its association with Chanel, in order to call to mind Chanel".

Heller's brand made fashion headlines last year when it was found to be at the root of a disagreement between Saint Laurent and Parisian boutique Colette. Heller's "Aint Laurent" merchandise - which passed comment on creative director Hedi Slimane's decision to drop the word Yves from the brand's logo - was stocked by Colette, leading Slimane to pull his Saint Laurent collection in its entirety from the store.

The website, which is still offering the "Official Chanel X Ghostbusters" designs for sale, also stocks products which parody or infringe (depending on your point of view) the famous logos of brands including Hermès, Louis Vuitton and Dior. Whether any of these brands will take legal action remains to be seen, but Chanel is seeking damages that amount to up to "three times the amount of actual damages sustained" reported Vogue UK



✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

RELATED ARTICLES
» Gap back in New Dehli Court with Green The Gap Trademark Battle
» Two New Delhi Firms In Battle with GAP In Trademark Lawsuit
» Chanel Brand Sues Entrepreneur in Trademark Violation


Friday, 9 October 2015

Stella McCartney sues Steve Madden Over Handbag Rip Off

Stella McCartney SS15


STEVE MADDEN finds himself in trouble again, this time being taken to court by UK designer Stella McCartney.

It has always been a difficult line to cross when does a high street copy of a design cross the threshold to trademark infringement.

LEFT: STELLA MCCARTNEY FALABELLA BAG; RIGHT: STEVE MADDEN BTOTALLY BAG
All the major brands have at one time or another challenged this. High street retailers like H&M and Zara and  have become giants in the apparel industry by mass producing runway-derivative styles at wallet-friendly prices. Also vice versa: Saint Laurent was recently accused of knocking off a Forever 21 dress and selling it for 150 times the original price.


LEFT: STELLA MCCARTNEY FALABELLA BAG; RIGHT: STEVE MADDEN BTOTALLY BAG

Stella McCartney has an idea on the matter. The UK-based designer has filed a lawsuit against Steve Madden for copying her popular Falabella bag just a little too closely with his BTotally bag. According to WWD, the 22-page legal document cites the charges against Madden as "trade dress infringement, unfair competition, deceptive trade practices, trade dress dilution, and design patent infringement" involving the "marketing and sale of a knock-off".

This is not a new issue and Steve Madden Ltd were sued last year by Balenciaga for doing much the same thing.

But, when is a high street copy a knock-off?


✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

RELATED ARTICLES
» Steve Madden Settles TCPA Violations for $10 Million
» Taylor Swift Settles "Lucky 13" Lawsuit, Avoiding Trial
» Skechers Sues Steve Madden For 'Go Walk' Patent Infringement




Sunday, 2 August 2015

Chanel Brand Sues Entrepreneur in Trademark Violation

Chanel No: 5
Chanel Inc. is suing a Lithonia entrepreneur for at least $2 million, claiming the businessman is infringing on the global luxury company’s trademark logo and products.

In a suit filed recently in U.S. District Court in Atlanta, Chanel said Eric Williams is marketing and selling counterfeit products bearing the company’s logo through his Haus of Ebon accessories store at bonanza.com/booths/hausofebon, Chanel said the company is promoted on Facebook and Pinterest social sites.

Williams could not be reached for comment.

Chanel has been successful in going after businesses that the company claims have violated its trademark, joining other major brands determined to protect their products. Microsoft, for example, has sued several Georgia companies to protect its software.

Chanel said the fake products cause confusion and “deceive customers.”

In April, Chanel won an $894,650 judgment against a Las Vegas businessman the company said counterfeited and sold fake Chanel products, according to Courthouse News Service. Last year, an Indiana salon owner was forced to drop “Chanel” from her business’ name.

Chanel said the Haus of Ebon products carrying its logo include cases and covers for phones and other electronic devices and cosmetic cases. The company said the products with its luxury “mark” will be mistaken for “the genuine high quality goods” offered by Chanel.

According to Forbes magazine, Chanel has annual sales of $5.4 billion.

Chanel is seeking profits from any products sold by the Haus of Ebon and damages in the amount of $2 million for each violation of its trademark.


✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

RELATED ARTICLES
» eBay defeats Tiffany in counterfeit jewellery suit
» Skechers Sues Steve Madden For 'Go Walk' Patent Infringement
» Louis Vuitton Files Suit in Connection with Counterfeit Goods on Alibaba

Monday, 18 May 2015

Help Us Fight Fakes, Alibaba's Impassioned Plea to Global Brands

Jack Ma Alibaba Founder pic: Bloomberg News
Alibaba's head of internet security Ni Liang makes an impassioned plea for help to stop fakes to Global brands in an exclusive interview today with John Ruwitch, Reuters.

"HANGZHOU, China (Reuters) - When it comes to fighting fakes, Alibaba's head of internet security says cooperation beats the courtroom any day.

Ni Liang, who runs the Hangzhou, China-based company's anti-counterfeiting operations, was speaking to Reuters days after Gucci, Yves Saint Laurent and other luxury brands owned by Paris-based Kering SA sued Alibaba in New York, alleging the e-commerce giant had knowingly made it possible for counterfeiters to sell fakes.

Ni said brands had a better chance of succeeding in clamping down on the pervasive counterfeit trade if they talked to Alibaba, instead of suing it.

The company has been dogged for years by accusations that it doesn't do enough to fight intellectual property rights violations and also listed counterfeits as a risk before its record-breaking $25 billion IPO in September.

"I strongly believe that spending money on lawsuits could result in a completely different outcome than cooperating with us," Ni said in an interview during a rare visit by the media to Alibaba's internet security headquarters.

"If a brand doesn't cooperate with us we'll still fight fakes for them... But when we cooperate we can fight better."

Alibaba employs some 2,000 employees to battle counterfeits. At its internet security command centre, a computer screen covering an entire wall tallies in real-time attempts by vendors to list suspected counterfeits and shows which brands they were trying to sell. Vendors known to have attempted to sell fakes are also tracked.

Another 5,000 "volunteers" around the country, including sellers and buyers, help identify vendors of phony goods, Ni said, adding that Alibaba spent about 100 million yuan ($16 million) last year to covertly buy products and check their authenticity.

Ni said this figure could rise to 150 million this year. "I believe we spend more than any platform or company in the world on anti-counterfeit efforts," he added.

REAL-TIME

Alibaba's two popular platforms are Taobao, on which consumers buy and sell goods to each other much like they do on the marketplace run by U.S.-based eBay Inc , and Tmall, an online shopping mall that vendors use to sell their products, similar to Amazon.com Inc .

The company, founded by Jack Ma, controls 80 percent of all online retail in China, handling goods worth about $97 billion in the quarter ended March 31.

Alibaba has so far signed more than 1,300 memoranda of understanding on cooperation with brands, including Microsoft , Apple and Louis Vuitton , to fight fakes, Ni said.

Overall, Alibaba's platforms have seen a drop in the number of counterfeits as a percentage of goods traded, Ni said, but added the number of fake products discovered by the company rose two-thirds to 130 million last year from 80 million in 2012.

Counterfeit goods can be found on all Chinese e-commerce platforms, despite efforts to fight them, because of the sheer scale of the problem and the huge demand for these products.

No pictures of the internet security war room are allowed. An Alibaba spokeswoman told Reuters they could not name any of the brands being targeted by fraudsters but data on the tracking screen showed more than 5,000 attempted listings of suspected fake products had been detected and removed by noon.

A search for "Gucci" and "Guggi" on Alibaba's eBay-like Taobao site also highlights the complexity of the problem.

Ads appear for products that look like genuine articles as well as clear knock-offs. Ni said determining authenticity from photos is notoriously difficult, and products that bear a likeness to the real deal may not infringe upon intellectual property rights.

Brands and industry groups have complained that Alibaba makes it difficult to remove suspect product listings. Ni said last year his team removed 12 million listings after receiving complaints involving about 20 million, but the process can be lengthy.

About 40 percent of all items flagged were either genuine or it was impossible to conclude that they were fake, he said.

"We have to have an audit mechanism for complaints made by brand holders, and this audit mechanism increases the time it takes to get fake products pulled down," he said, adding that Alibaba intends to double the number of cases it sends to the police for prosecution this year."

(Additional reporting by Jane Lee in SHANGHAI; Editing by Miral Fahmy)

Read the original article on Reuters.


✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

RELATED ARTICLES
» Taobao Teams Up With Apple, Gucci To Remove Counterfeit Products
» Bank of China Complies With Subpoena In Gucci Counterfeit Case
» Louis Vuitton Files Suit in Connection with Counterfeit Goods on Alibaba


Tuesday, 20 May 2014

Taylor Swift Sued by Lucky 13 Apparel Company for Trademark Infringement

Taylor Swift
E! News has exclusively learned that the Grammy winner is being sued by Orange County-based apparel company Lucky 13.

According to the lawsuit, which was filed early Tuesday morning, the clothing brand is accusing T.Swift of trademark infringement stemming from her unauthorised use of Lucky 13's federally registered trademarks.

The company, which was founded in 1991 and specialises in street wear, claims that they have contacted Swift's camp numerous times but there was no resolution.

The "I Knew You Were Trouble" songstress has made no secret of the fact that the
Lucky 13
superstitious number plays a big role in her life.


Not only is her birthday Dec. 13, but her Twitter handle includes the number as well.
She's also been spotted onstage with the number drawn on her hand during her many sold-out concerts.

"The significance of the number 13 on my hand…I paint this on my hand before every show because 13 is my lucky number—for a lot of reasons," she once explained to MTV News. "It's really weird."

"I was born on the 13th. I turned 13 on Friday the 13th. My first album went gold in 13 weeks. My first No. 1 song had a 13-second intro. Every time I've won an award I've been seated in either the 13th seat, the 13th row, the 13th section or row M, which is the 13th letter."

She added, "Basically whenever a 13 comes up in my life, it's a good thing."

✿ » For trusted authentic luxury products & services, visit The UK's Most Trusted Online Reseller


RELATED ARTICLES

Thursday, 21 November 2013

Luxury Jeweller Van Cleef & Arpels charged with counterfeit

Follow on Bloglovin



VAN CLEEF & ARPELS France's High-end French jewellers has been charged with using a ring design allegedly stolen from a gem trader, according to a court document obtained by AFP on Saturday.

Trader Francois Le Goarant de Tromelin filed a complaint against the exclusive jewelry house in 2011 claiming to hold the rights to the model of a ring set with precious gems called the "Antoinette", thought to be named in honour of his wife, Antonieta.

The jeweler was charged with counterfeit on June 14, a judicial source told AFP.

Van Cleef & Arpels disputes Le Goarant's story and claims full ownership of the design.

The dispute is just the latest between the trader and the company connected to a separate affair between Le Goarant and another trader, Robert Szumeraj, with whom he shared an office before Szumeraj was murdered in 1997 by a business rival.

Le Goarant alleges that Szumeraj took the designs from a safe without his knowledge and attempted to sell them to jewellery houses around Paris, eventually finding success at Van Cleef & Arpels.

According to the court document, the jeweler is accused of having "taken the initiative to fraudulently manufacture or have manufactured said models and sell them directly" in its flagship Paris store and in Japan.

A lawyer for Van Cleef & Arpels, Nicolas Huc-Morel, said the accusations were unfounded and added the company would "strongly dispute" what he termed "alleged acts of counterfeit on older models of jewellery".

Huc-Morel said Le Goarant had previously faced Van Cleef in the civil courts and that the case had been dismissed.

Le Goarant's lawyer, Joseph Breham, said he had new proof of his client's ownership of around 40 designs, including the Antoinette ring.

via Agence France-Presse

For luxury authentic products and services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Follow on Bloglovin
Follow Me on Pinterest

Northern Ireland is top region for counterfeit and fake fashion

Follow on Bloglovin



NORTHERN IRELAND is the "knock-off capital" of the UK regions outside London, according to a new report by UTV News

The PwC report published on Wednesday said counterfeit goods have gone mainstream with adults in the UK regularly buying counterfeit alcohol, cigarettes, medicines, films and music, clothes and car parts.

The report found that outside London - the most fake-infested part of the UK - Northern Ireland is the regional counterfeit capital, while those surveyed in Scotland reported significantly fewer fake purchases than the national average.

People in Northern Ireland admit to buying more counterfeit clothing and accessories, films, music and alcohol than other regions.

More than half of those surveyed in Northern Ireland said they "sometimes" purchased counterfeit clothing and accessories, films and music - the highest percentages across the UK, including London.

Almost a quarter of respondents in the region said they had bought counterfeit alcohol, compared to the UK's 18% average.

Of those who had bought fake goods, 64% of respondents said they did so because they "cannot afford the genuine product".

Mark James, from PwC's anti-counterfeiting team, said that counterfeits have an obvious impact on profit and jobs, yet people increasingly see access to fakes as a normal, consumer choice.

"The digital economy and global supply chains have made tracking counterfeit goods and measuring their economic damage fiendishly complex," he said.

"Companies invest significant amounts of time, money in effort in developing their products, while manufacturers and buyers of counterfeit goods strike right at the heart of that.

"Ultimately, companies are seeing their brand, reputation and revenues stolen."

According to the European Commission counterfeiting and piracy could be costing the UK economy £30bn and over 14,500 UK jobs.

For luxury authentic products and services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Follow on Bloglovin
Follow Me on Pinterest

Sunday, 20 October 2013

Gucci Awarded 144.2 Million Dollars in Case Against Counterfeit Fake Fashion

Follow on Bloglovin

Counterfeit Gucci dust bag
Gucci America has been awarded 144.2 million dollars in damages in a case against online fake fashion counterfeiters.

Gucci filed the lawsuit against the counterfeiters in May 2013, alleging the abuse of the Gucci name and trademark to sell counterfeit goods online. Amidst the defeat of the luxury brand house shock defeat Guess Wins Trademark Suit in Italy which was a humiliating defeat at the same time. The luxury house was not about to lose again.

Gucci got out their legal big guns and went to battle pulling no punches successfully showing that the domain names used publicity campaigns very similar to those of the Italian luxury brands, as well as official product images and descriptions to try and coax consumers into purchasing counterfeit goods.

The company’s president and CEO, Patrizio de Marco, stated that “We are extremely pleased that the court clearly understood the dangers to consumers posed by online counterfeiting organisations and has sent a strong message that counterfeiters can expect to receive severe sanctions when caught.”

According to the presiding judge, US District Court Judge William P. Dimitrouleas, the amount in damages awarded includes the additional amount of interest from the date the lawsuit was filed.
Counterfeit Gucci sneakers advertised on website
As well as successfully proving this the U.S. district court for the Southern District of Florida also ordered ”the immediate surrender to Gucci of 155 domain names used in the counterfeiting operation.”

What does this mean now for the counterfeit market coming on the announcement that Taobao Market Teams up with Louis Vuitton to Remove Counterfeit of the massive Chinese online market place Alibaba e-commerce site. And who can forget Taobao.com signed a similar agreement with Gucci themselves a few years back Taobao Teams Up With Gucci and Apple to Remove Counterfeit Products.

This victory shows the major brands are no longer going to sit back and let counterfeits infringe on trademarks and profits.

For luxury authentic products & services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Follow on Bloglovin
Follow Me on Pinterest

Richemont wins victory in TradeKey counterfeit fake fashion law suit

Follow on Bloglovin

Chloe counterfeit bag, evidence in TradeKey case. Source VentureBeat
RICHEMONT luxury fashion brand owner have won a significant victory in the war against counterfeit fake fashion and defeated Trade Key e-commerce with the help of one man.  Rob Holmes is a private investigator and owner of IPCybercrime from Plano, Texas, and he blew the lid on one of the world’s biggest counterfeit goods sales sites with a year-long undercover operation. In doing so, he may have helped give brands a new legal tool in their attempt to stamp out billions of dollars in sales lost to counterfeiting each year.

In an interview with VentureBeat, Holmes said his work helped unearth evidence that the Pakistani e-commerce vendor TradeKey helped enable wholesale trading of thousands of counterfeit goods over the Internet by setting up a “virtual swap meet” where vendors could sell fake goods with impunity. A federal judge ruled on Oct. 8 that TradeKey had violated copyright law and contributed to the counterfeiting of goods made by companies, including Holmes’ client, Richemont, the owner of six luxury fashion brands including Mont Blanc-Simplo, Cartier, Chloe, Alfred Dunhill, Officine Panerai, and Lange Uhren. Holmes said he found thousands of cases of large-scale counterfeit listings during his undercover work.

Holmes told Venture Beat how, at the request of Richemont’s lawyers, he organised the undercover investigation with luxury brand company’s legal team as it pursued TradeKey, a site that had more than 5 million members at the time of the investigation. The tale is a case study in how big brands are going after shadowy counterfeiters and how tricky it can be to collect evidence that will bring those counterfeiters down.

The case could set a new legal precedent, since an earlier ruling in 2010 put the burden of stamping out counterfeiting on e-commerce sites on the brand claiming to be a victim. In the case of Tiffany v. eBay, the U.S. courts ruled that eBay was not responsible for policing its market for counterfeits sold by third parties. That decision put the burden on brands to provide proof to eBay if they wanted it to take down a counterfeit sale.

But in the TradeKey case, the evidence of counterfeiting was so widespread throughout the site that a federal judge ruled that TradeKey was in fact responsible for curbing counterfeit sales. That ruling by U.S. District Court judge Gary Allen Feess in Los Angeles is the latest result of a one-year investigation and three-year legal case against TradeKey. The judge found that TradeKey had “actively promoted and facilitated the sale” of counterfeits. He ordered it to monitor its sales.

TradeKey counterfeit listings. Source VentureBeat
“This is the first case that holds an online marketplace liable for contributing to counterfeiting,” Holmes said in an interview with VentureBeat. “And they were the No. 1 counterfeiting site in the world. This was the big, bad one.”

It’s hard to verify if TradeKey was the biggest counterfeiting site, but Holmes does work for about 50 brands, and the lawyer for Richemont agrees it was a big one.

“We believe the case is groundbreaking in the magnitude of the counterfeiting on TradeKey.com,” said Susan Kayser, legal counsel for Richemont at the law firm Jones Day, in an interview. “Rob Holmes’ investigation was essential to the case. The court relied heavily on the investigation’s findings in its ruling.”

TradeKey’s attorney, Erik Syverson of Miller Barondess, said in an e-mail, “We completely disagree with the court’s ruling, factual findings and application of the law, particularly with respect to contributory liability principles. Followed to its logical conclusion, this ruling requires web sites that permit user-generated advertising to proactively screen for infringing or counterfeit items listed for sale. That is not the law.”

He added, “The law has always required that trademark owners perform such a function. Furthermore, the ruling impermissibly restricts the legal use of trademarks in meta data and Adwords, even by third parties not connected to this lawsuit. For example, under this ruling, I cannot list for sale on my client’s website my own collection of authentic Mont Blanc pens, or even mention Mont Blanc for comparative advertising purposes.”

He said TradeKey is considering its options.

For luxury authentic products & services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Content thanks:VentureBeat

Follow on Bloglovin
Follow Me on Pinterest

eBay defeats Tiffany in counterfeit jewellery suit

Follow on Bloglovin

NEW YORK | Mon Sep 13, 2010 5:34pm EDT

Tiffany & Co.
EBay Inc on Monday won dismissal of aTiffany & Co lawsuit accusing the auctioneer of deceiving customers by allowing the sale of counterfeit Tiffany jewellery on its website.

U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan in Manhattan rejected Tiffany's allegation that eBay engaged in false advertising, the last remaining claim after a federal appeals court on April 1 dismissed the rest of Tiffany's trademark infringement case.

The case has been viewed as a challenge in the United States to Internet companies such as eBay, Google Inc and others that host services that other people provide, and do not responsible for users' trademark violations.

"Tiffany failed to establish that eBay intentionally set out to deceive the public, much less that eBay's conduct was of an egregious nature sufficient to create a presumption that consumers were being deceived," the judge wrote.
Mark Aaron, a Tiffany spokesman, declined to comment. Michelle Fang, eBay's associate general counsel, called the ruling "an unequivocal validation of eBay's business practices."

About $3.99 billion, or 46 percent, of eBay's 2009 revenue came from the United States, a regulatory filing shows.

Tiffany accused eBay of advertising the sale of its goods through ads on its website, and through sponsored links on search engines, which would sometimes link to its own website and exhort readers to "Find Tiffany items at low prices."
Sullivan agreed with Tiffany that eBay knew "a portion" of the goods being sold were fake.

But he said Tiffany failed to show that eBay's advertisements misled customers or necessarily implied that all Tiffany products sold on its website were genuine.
"Tiffany has failed to present evidence that rises to the high level of egregious misconduct required to demonstrate that eBay had an intent to deceive customers," he wrote.

Sullivan also pointed to eBay efforts to fight fraud, which the company has said costs up to $20 million a year.

In its April 1 ruling, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals had upheld Sullivan's July 2008 dismissal of most of Tiffany's lawsuit, saying that "eBay did not itself sell counterfeit Tiffany goods; only the fraudulent vendors did."
Tiffany is based in New York and eBay in San Jose, California.

The case is Tiffany (NJ) Inc et al v. eBay Inc, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 04-04607.

For luxury authentic products and services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Content thanks: Reuters

Follow on Bloglovin
Follow Me on Pinterest

Sunday, 8 September 2013

Target’s Mossimo Messenger knockoff Proenza Schouler PS1 bag?

The Proenza Schouler PS1 Large leather satchel

PROENZA SCHOULER brand’s beloved PS1 bag has an uncanny copy by Mossimo on the sales floor at Target—a knockoff that smarts for designers Lazaro Hernandez and Jack McCollough because they created a Go International collection for the store (which, because of the recent Go International anniversary reissue, is being sold now. But on Wednesday, the Proenza designers, Jack McCollough and Lazaro Hernandez, became aware themselves when Mr. McCollough’s sister in California e-mailed a photo of the Mossimo bag at her local Target and another blog mentioned the similarities. The designers say they are disappointed with Target. Reported the New York Times 25/03/11.

This messenger bag, sold at Target under the Mossimo label. To be sure, the bags are not 100 percent identical. The Mossimo bag £22.38 ($34.99) is made of fake leather, while the PS1 £1,020 ($1,595 for the medium-size version) is of genuine leather. The placement of the straps is slightly different, and the PS1 utilises a distinctive fold-down closure in antiqued brass whereas the Target model has an ordinary turn-key closure. But other design parallels are hard to ignore. The PS1, which Proenza brought out two years ago after a fair amount of research and development, has a V-shaped front flap cross-sectioned with trim detail to suggest a square; so does the Mossimo. And the straps that run over the front of the PS1 are tucked into small flat loops free of hardware; ditto the Mossimo.

“Our whole aesthetical idea with this bag was to take the hardware off,” Mr. Hernandez said on Thursday as he and Mr. McCollough and Shirley Cook, the company’s chief executive, examined photos of the Target bag in their SoHo office. “And the attitude, the slouch of the bag — they got the weight really right,” Mr. Hernandez added with a rueful laugh.

The similarities are not lost on bloggers, though a certain logic is. “I can’t believe how much alike they are!” a commenter said on myaffordablebeauty.com. And here is this unquestioning post from Mattieologie: “I’ve expressed numerous times how much I love Proenza Schouler’s PS1 bag, but I am so far from affording it. But luckily there’s this magical place Target where they make dreams true. Exhibit A: the Mossimo Messenger bag per Target is a clever variation of the PS1 for the fraction of the price.”

The messenger bag, sold at Target under the Mossimo label
Mr. McCollough can understand that people love bargains and knockoffs, but variations, clever or not, rob companies, small companies like Proenza, of opportunities. Reading the post, he remarked, “Yeah, why save up and buy ours when you can buy theirs right away?”

Ms. Cook said that the PS1 “has been a huge part of the growth of our business, as well a significant branding element.” But what especially troubles the designers about what they see as a knockoff is that they have had a collaborative relationship with Target in the mass merchant’s Go International program. Several years ago the designers did a spring collection of about 65 pieces for Target, and recently they agreed to let the merchant reissue some of those looks for its Go anniversary promotion.

“So our product is in Target right now, and then this bag comes out,” Ms. Cook said. “It’s just disappointing, especially from someone we worked with.”
Copying is rampant at all levels of the fashion industry, and legal protection is limited and costly to pursue. But the closeness of the Mossimo bag’s styling, similar enough to invite comparisons to the PS1, is surprising in view of Target’s relationships with designers. For that reason, Mr. McCollough said, he wishes that Target would stop selling the Mossimo bag.

That seems unlikely. On Thursday, in response to my query, a Target spokesman, Joshua Thomas, issued a statement: “Target is committed to offering our guests everyday essentials alongside highly differentiated merchandise, all at a great value. It always has been and continues to be the policy of Target to respect the intellectual property rights of others.” Mr. Thomas said the company had no further comment.

Content Friend: CATHY HORYN

For luxury authentic products & services; http://www.luxuryonlinestore.net

RELATED ARTICLES

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it, leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Follow Me on Pinterest