1) Trump & The “De minimis” Loophole - Trade Regulations
Trump has no room in his heart for tariffs. Guess what Trump has? A will and way. We’ve seen Mr. President of the U.S. of A. issue more executive orders than God intended these past few weeks, and one of them was one to close the “de minimis” loophole, a trade rule that lets foreign e-commerce giants send cheap packages to U.S. shoppers, no duties, no customs hassle, just effortless delivery. How convenient. We don’t like Shein and Temu, and neither does the President, and so he disrupts the operations of these ultra-fast-fashion retailers, which have milked this loophole to flood American shoppers with dirt-cheap goods. The “de minimis” rule allows anything under $800 to get a free pass - no tariffs, no customs, just a one-way express lane from a sweatshop to your closet. Back in 2015, they bumped the limit from $200 to “cut red tape”. Fast forward, and what started as a trickle became a flood, 139 million tax-free packages then, a radical 1.36 billion now. Foreign retailers feasted. The government napped. One executive order later, and Shein’s business model just walked into oncoming traffic.
Who wouldn’t when you’ve been running a discount empire on a tax loophole, shipping cut-rate fashion faster than a Ponzi scheme pays out? But that’s all over now… Tariffs are rolling in, customs is actually reading the fine print, and suddenly, fast fashion’s looking like a slow, expensive nightmare. So I hope no one here was too attached to those $3 Temu tops. If you have a will and a way as well, expect delays, expect price hikes, but for the love of all that’s holy, don’t ever expect that top to survive more than one single spin cycle.
2) Gucci v. Lord & Taylor - Trademark Infringement
Who better to make huge mistakes to prove their size than a small fish in a big pond. This is Gucci v. Lord & Taylor, I’ll let you guess who’s bigger. The big mistakes I’m alluding to are on Lord & Taylor’s end, the end that won’t begin to collaborate with the court. So Gucci is seeking a court order to hold Lord & Taylor in civil contempt for refusing to comply with the previous default judgement, which is to destroy counterfeit Gucci products. This isn’t new, it was actually filed in November 2023, by Gucci, who, again, accused the retailer of selling fake Gucci handbags, shoes, and belts online. Back then, Lord & Taylor wasn’t so difficult and allowed an inventory inspection - the court inspected the inventory, saw the fakes, and assumed, like any sane person, that the retailer would own up to it. But no. They ignored all court mandates and notifications, which is all the court needed to rule in Gucci’s favor in 2024.
Now, in 2025, with Lord & Taylor still refusing to turn over the counterfeit goods, Gucci is pushing for the U.S. Marshals - or anyone with a badge, really - to go and do the work themselves. In any way, it might be better than the work they do at Lord & Taylor given the financial troubles they’re looking at. The retailer filed for bankruptcy in 2020, and since then shuffled through more owners than a used car lot, and somehow still thinks it can go against Gucci. It’s like betting your last dollar on a horse that’s already limping. It’s not a comeback - it’s a final lap before hitting the wall. Gucci isn’t just looking for an apology or an inventory sweep. No, they’re calling in the U.S. Marshals, ready to seize those counterfeits with all the subtlety of a Wall Street raid. And Lord & Taylor? They’re doubling down, playing poker with their last chips, convinced they can bluff their way out of this. Call it being cocky, call it trademark violations - Gucci just called its lawyers.
3) Richemont v. Silversmiths inc. - Intellectual Property Law
To the creative team are Silversmiths Inc - create a valid reason to sell imitations of a very known, very loved bracelet. That or create a completely new never seen before bracelet. Can’t do either? Didn’t think so. Don’t know if Richemeont would believe it but they certainly filed a lawsuit against Silversmiths Inc., accusing the company of trademark counterfeiting, infringement, and dilution of unauthorized replicas of the Van Cleef Arpels, again, known and loved Alhambra jewelry. No more passive aggressive emails, especially since between now and 2020, it has been alleged that Silversmiths’ been selling said imitations, even after many and more cease-and-desist letters.
Richemont isn’t just asking for a refund, that would be too easy - they want it all: permanent injunctions, monetary damages, and the destruction of every single counterfeit good. If you’re lucky, they might even let you off easy at $2 million per mark. The absurdity of this whole thing isn’t lost on anyone. Selling fakes? Fine. Selling fakes that are practically begging for a lawsuit? That’s a business strategy worth questioning. Here's some insider trading for you: If you want to compete with the blue chips, you need to innovate or get out of the game. Pushing counterfeit might seem like a genius play, but when it all comes crashing down, you'll be lucky if you're left with the shirt on your back and a string on your wrist.
Related Posts
