I only bring this up because I’ve always thought the bags to be quite hideous. Even if they’re supporting terrorism:
HAND BAGS OF DOUGH AT STAKE
Louis Vuitton Malletier v. Dooney & Bourke, Inc. (2nd Cir. 2006)
Louis Vuitton sued Dooney & Bourke for trademark infringement of its Multicolore patterned pocketbook. Early in the case, Plaintiff Louis Vuitton filed and lost its motion for preliminary injunction to stop D&B from imitating its “LV” logo style with its “DB” logo style. In denying the motion, Judge Shira Scheindlin said that issuance of an injunction would hurt competition by giving the French luxury goods company a monopoly over a look.
On Appeal, the Second Circuit affirmed the denial of the injunction based on Federal dilution, but vacated and remanded the portion of the order addressing the remaining claims, including Lanham Act and New York state trademark infringement and dilution claim. Among the reasons for the remand were that: 1) the District Court placed too high a burden on Plaintiff by requiring a “strong” likelihood of success on the merits as a opposed to a mere “likelihood of success”; and 2) the Court inappropriately focused on the similarities of the marks in a side-by-side comparison instead of viewing the products sequentially in the context of the marketplace.
The Second Circuit concluded by indicating that “on remand, [the court] should consider the precise trademark claimed by the plaintiff and whether, under market conditions and when viewed sequentially, Vuitton can prove likelihood of confusion between its Multicolore mark and the pattern of the D&B’s It-Bag.”
With much at stake, I am certain this case will be revisited in a later newsletter.
Did NO ONE else notice this? Or was it just me…?