Articles
-
Dunhill Prevails in Trademark Dispute Against Danhuoli in China
Dunhill has secured a decisive ruling in China against Danhuoli, a company found guilty of trademark infringement and unfair competition. The Foshan Intermediate People’s Court ordered Danhuoli to pay RMB 10 million (approximately $1.47 million USD) in damages. The ruling is a strong signal that China’s intellectual property enforcement is tightening, particularly for foreign luxury…
-
Tiffany & Co. vs. Costco: The $21 Million Dispute That Ended Quietly
With packaging and presentation drawing focus in the IP community, the resolved case between Tiffany & Co. and Costco Wholesale Corporation offers notable insights. This eight-year dispute ended with a settlement and dismissal with prejudice, preventing Tiffany from pursuing similar claims against Costco. While the settlement terms remain undisclosed, the case emphasises key aspects of…
-
The Ritz-Carlton Fined $535,000 for Hazardous Waste Violations in California
Environmental regulations have long been non-negotiable, and luxury hotel brands are no exception. In 2022, The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, renowned for its high-end accommodations, faced a $535,000 civil penalty for mishandling hazardous waste across its eight California properties, including its Rancho Mirage location in Riverside County. Court Judgment Highlights Mismanagement A judgment issued by the…
-
Ferrari vs. Philipp Plein: The Price of Trademark Missteps
Ferrari has made its position unmistakable: its trademarks are not open to reinterpretation. A dispute involving Philipp Plein’s unauthorised use of Ferrari’s trademarks has led to significant penalties, drawing attention from the fashion and automotive industries. Rulings by Italian courts highlight the serious consequences of misusing trademarks, particularly those tied to luxury brands. The Instagram…
-
Piaget’s Timely Action: Securing the Brand One Domain at a Time
Piaget, the Swiss luxury brand renowned for its high-end watches and jewellery, faced a domain name dispute involving the protection of its trademark. The conflict centered on two domain names, piagetwatch(dot)com and piagetwatches(dot)com, which were deemed confusingly similar to the Piaget trademark. The Complaint Richemont, the Swiss luxury group behind Piaget, alleged that the domain…
-
Montblanc’s Fight to Protect Its Name: The Case of the Counterfeit Pens
Counterfeit products have plagued luxury brands for decades, threatening their reputation and customer trust. In one such case, Montblanc, the renowned German manufacturer of luxury writing instruments, successfully defended its trademark rights against a group of counterfeiters operating under the guise of a legitimate e-commerce platform. The Case at Hand Montblanc, a German brand known…
-
Issey Miyake’s BAO BAO Case: The Financial Impact of Unoriginal Designs
The Tokyo District Court once again reminded us that in the fashion, innovation comes with rights. In a dispute over the iconic BAO BAO ISSEY MIYAKE bags, the Largu Co., Ltd. found out the hard way that copying is not just lazy but it’s expensive. The court awarded JPY 71 million (USD 49,500) in damages…
-
Levi’s Blank Tab: The Subtle Art of Trademark Protection
Levi’s Blank Tab, one of the most frequently copied trademarks in the world! Levi Strauss & Co. has built its reputation on durable denim and innovative branding. Central to this legacy is the trademarked Tab, a small but very important element of the Levi’s brand. Today, we are discussing the blank Tab or plain tab…
-
Gucci vs. Guess Dispute: From Lawsuit to Resolution
The Gucci vs. Guess trademark dispute offers an insightful look at the challenges of enforcing intellectual property rights in fashion. What began as Gucci’s bold legal move to protect its iconic branding turned into a prolonged global legal battle. While Gucci secured victories in several jurisdictions, the case concluded in 2018 with a confidential settlement.…
-
Rolling Into Trouble: Vans vs. MSCHF and the ‘Wavy Baby’ Sneakers
The dispute between Vans and MSCHF over the Wavy Baby sneakers was anything but a smooth ride. Vans claimed that MSCHF’s shoes infringed upon its Old Skool trade dress, while MSCHF contended that the sneakers were a form of parody protected by the First Amendment. This case is not merely about shoes; it’s a legal…