1) Trump against the Associated Press - Copyright Law
What time is it? Time to look at the cease-and-desist Associated Press just hit TheBestWatchesonEarth LLC with. Seems like the latter used a very recognizable picture of Trump, a picture that the former owns, and that clearly no one should be using. Quick note; TheBestWatchesonEarth LLC is a Wyoming-based company behind a certain someone. Guess who? Donald Trump, of course. And the picture being used is the picture of that certain someone raising his fist after the July 13 assassination attempt. You know the one. Anyway, the Associated Press’ picture isn’t free promo, at least according to them, and they’re not happy about Trump or TheBestWatchesonEarth LLC using it, and argue that it infringes its copyright, since the image is licensed strictly for editorial use.
Just another thing. That watch is called the “Fighter” watch, and it claims to be Swiss-made, a bold statement, especially since its Swiss credentials have all the authenticity of a Vegas wedding. And if copyright lawsuits are any indication, this isn’t Trump’s first dance with intellectual property trouble. Music names from the White Stripes to Isaac Hayes have already taken him to court for unauthorized campaign tunes. Looks like “Fighter” is right on brand, but it might end up fighting a legal battle before it even hits the shelves.
2) Hermès and the EUIPO - Intellectual Property
We’ve talked about trademarking logos and names. We’ve talked about trademarking designs. We’ve even talked about trademarking colors. But have we talked about trademarking letters? Well, we’re about to. Hermès recently secured a partial victory in a trademark dispute before the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), over the “H” of the Oran sandals. Bravo! But, since there’s always always a downside, they unfortunately lost the protections for other goods like boots, hats, and gloves, simply because there was insufficient evidence of use. I guess the judge didn't shop at Hermès often…
We all know the “H” is not ornamental, that it’s not “more structural than statement-making”, as per Markus Bennemann, and agreed to by the EUIPO. What do they know about little orange boxes? Next thing you know they’ll be telling you heels are good for your posture. Ridiculous. Now Hermès has to go back to prove its worth on t-shirts and sweatshirts too. Clearly, distinctiveness is everything, and when it comes to making a mark, Hermès just reminded us that every single cut-out counts.
3) Adidas said “Goodbye” to Yeezy - Corporate Law
Forgive and forget is all nice and sweet up until there’s money involved. We all saw the partnership between Adidas and Ye (formerly Kanye West), the man who practically invented “shock value”. And anyone with a pulse and Internet connection saw Ye’s so-called “expressions”. Some might say he made “free speech” look like a contact sport, but we know for sure Adidas was not the biggest fan and pulled the plug on Yeezy faster than you can say “Did he really just say that?”. Adidas CEO Bjorn Gulden’s now assuring us all claims between the parties had been withdrawn, with neither side owing anything to the other. As for the financials? Not a cent will change hands, because - surprise, surprise - there’s nothing left to claim.
But it’s never that simple, is it? Adidas may have washed its hands of Ye, but the Yeezy drama still clings like last season’s glitter. A few ticked-off investors are demanding answers, claiming that former CEO Kasper Rorsted and CFO Harm Ohlmeyer gift-wrapped the Yeezy deal with a little too much sparkle and not enough transparency. According to them, Adidas knew what they were signing up for but conveniently left out a few details. The judge may have tossed the case, but those shareholders are back for round two, appealing the decision and keeping Adidas knee-deep in the Yeezy fallout. Because in fashion, just like in finance, nothing is truly over until the lawyers stop calling.
4) Chanel v. Jonak - Design Protection
I know my mom would have slapped my wrist if I ever dared to play dress up with her two-tone slingbacks from Chanel. Jonak beat me to it, though, and got handed a €200,000 invoice. That’s way more than a slap on the wrist, but raise your hand if you think it’s deserved! The Paris Court of Appeals would agree, and they are not amused. Jonak tried to pass off a Chanel lookalike, and Chanel gets €150,000 in economic damages and an extra €30,000 for the insult, because that beige-and-black heel is more than a shoe - it’s practically a piece of French heritage. The court saw right through Jonak’s little “homage” and ruled that their Chanel knockoff, paired with Chanel-esque accessories, could confuse shoppers and cash in on Chanel's hard-earned credit.
And the court didn’t just slap a fine on it. They ordered Jonak to wipe every trace of these wannabe slingbacks from their social media, pull them from the shelves, and scrap all remaining inventory. If they miss the deadline? That’s €1,000 a day down the drain. Chanel’s win might be just the beginning, too. Copycats, once again, take note: you’re not fooling anyone, and in fashion, flattery isn’t just cheap - it’s costly. And with that, the judges made it crystal clear: knockoffs may be a sad little trend, but lawsuits? Well, that’s their runway.
Related Posts
