Archive for the ‘Litigation’ Category

eBay fined €1.7m in ongoing battle with LVMH

Monday, November 30th, 2009

ebay-logo

Louis Vuitton- LVMH- & eBay sure are playing a game of back and forth in French Courts over the past few years.  eBay been taking a beating.  It's now been sanctioned to the amount of €1.7m for allowing the sale of over 1000 unauthorized (but authentic) LVMH purfumes & cosmetics on the site.  They're saying that eBay breached an injunction set in place in June of 2008,  barring eBay from allowing the posting of perfumes or cosmetics in LVMH brands (LV, Dior, Kenzo, Givenchy, and Guerlain).

In response to today's eBay's general manager in France, Alex von Schirmeister said,

"Today's outcome hurts consumers by preventing them from buying and selling authentic items online. The injunction is an abuse of 'selective distribution.' It effectively enforces restrictive distribution contracts, which is anti-competitive. We believe that the higher courts will overturn this ruling and ensure that eCommerce companies such as eBay will continue to provide a platform for buyers and sellers to trade authentic goods... The fine itself is disproportionate given that eBay complied with the Injunction. It is out of step with our legal victories in France, UK, Germany, Belgium and the U.S."

I attalicized the highlighted parts in that quote myself- because they're just dead on.  I'm all for very agressive measures in doing whatever it takes to remove fakes from any an all online marketplaces (and off).  What I am totally against- are measures that are put in place that restrict the freedoms that individual owners have to do what they will with their own personal property.

I mean, if someone wants to throw a bottle of perfectly good Dior perfume that they bought themselves in the fireplace (not smart by the way)- so be it.  If they want to give it to their sister, or throw it in the bin, or pour it down the drain- or sell it on eBay- they should have that right.  Any decision that limits our ability to make those decisions- is limiting a fundemanetal personal property right.

Not only that- but the ability that we have to resell our property facilitates the inherent value of that piece.  One of the reasons that your new Mercedes, or Tiffany ring, or Breitling watch  keeps its value so well- is that the brand and quality are internationally recognizable- and resellable.  You can at any time, recoup much of your investment.  Luxury manufacturers who attempt to limit the resale potential for legitimate owners is just not smart.

What do you think???

Read more about it in the Wall Street Journal...

Louis Vuitton Repair Facility Thief Caught

Monday, November 23rd, 2009

fedextruckvuitton

Whoa, I hadn't heard about this when it happened- and I'm sure LV didn't necessarily want it out there- but it looks like a FedEx driver was delivering $155,000 worth of authentic Louis Vuitton repair facility- when he stopped at Wendy's for a lunch break.  He apparently was torn away from his bacon double cheeseburger- by other diners telling him that three armed guys were breaking into his truck!  What's worse- they got away with all the stuff.

I can't imagine the nightmare this must have been for FedEx, Louis Vuitton and the poor LV loyalists who had their bags stolen!!!

Anyway... apparently the cops got a tip that a Glendora woman was selling stolen Louis Vuitton bags in purse parties from her apartment!  When the police dropped in, they found about $20,000 of the LV stuff (wow, she'd already sold most of it :( ) but they also found stolen Juicy Couture, Coach, Dooney & Bourke, Express, Tommy Hilfiger, Frederick's of Hollywood, North Face, Guess, True Religion and Abercrombie & Fitch.  It looked like most had been stolen from trucks & stores etc.

Here's the story from KCAL- be sure to watch the video.  So sad.

LV slaps eBay for Keyword Violations

Sunday, September 20th, 2009

ebayfashionphile

On record, LVMH just came out on top in a head to head trademark battle with eBay in Paris.  A tribunal there decided that eBay had indeed violated LVMH trademarks and fined them 80,000 Euros for it.  But this one really requires a closer look.  While they did win, relatively speaking.... they didn't win much.  And this is no ordinary trademark discussion...

First of all... LVMH was seeking 4 MILLION Euros (why am I imagining the lawyer with his pinkie to his lip!) from eBay (a $50+ BILLION company)... and the courts set damages at just 2% of that sum... or only 80,000 Euros.  It just kind of feels like this really is just a slap on the wrist.  LVMH can not be happy with that.

But part of the reason why the punishment wasn't more harsh- has got to be the fact that we're not talking a traditional run of the mill trademark case here.  You know the kind- and we TOTALLY support this type- where eBay gets sued for not doing more about fakes being listed on the site?

This was not one of those cases.  This is a keyword violation case.  eBay's deputy General Counsel phrased the legal question this way:

"Is it trademark infringement to buy and sell adwords?"

So basically, Louis Vuitton did not like the fact that eBay was paying for the use of keywords that they have trademarked.  These included words like Christian Dior, Givenchy, Kenzo, and Guerlain, and other LVMH owned perfume related & trademarked terms.  The entire case hung on the question of whether it is wrong to buy and sell adwords that include trademarked names.

Pierre Gode... the LVMH Group director said,

"The Tribunal has ruled that eBay, in using in its advertisements the keywords of some of LVMH's brands, has committed acts of counterfeiting through reproduction or imitation,"

IMO, this is going a bit far...  I mean, I know that Louis Vuitton has always kept tight control over the use (and mis-use) of their good name.  And I'm sure that's partially why they have maintained such great status and reputation over the years.  But, Louis Vuitton does not like any disruption of their distribution chain period.  They'd much rather that no one but their own Boutiques or other establishments under their control be able to sell items that they produce.  That sounds fine, but what it means in France, for example... is that if you buy an LVMH branded perfume, (Dior for example) and you bring it home- and just don't like it, you are not allowed to sell it on eBay.fr.  This was decided in the case that LVMH won against eBay last Fall.

Louis Vuitton controls items from production to sale- so any transactions going on outside of that chain- are basically considered countefeit.  You can see this in practice, in any item that you buy from LV.  Let's say you pick up a brand new Louis Vuitton Pegase suitcase from the louisvuitton.com- and end up haveing a problem with the handle.  The closest boutique is hours away- so you decide to bring it over to your local shoe repair for the quick fix.  Louis Vuitton will no longer consider this item authentic.  They will disassociate themselves with it, and will no longer accept it for repair.  Louis Vuitton's adwords battle is an effort in the same vein.

Like I said... I totally back any efforts to clean up all the fakes online & off.  But I'm not into this Google fight at all.  This is not the first time LVMH has sued in Keyword related trademark cases.  They sued Google and won.... in a case that focuses on Google's Adwords system being used by counterfeiters.  The result of this is that we (and other legitimate sellers like us) are not allowed to purchase these keywords on Google.  Basically this means that we can't use any LV trademarked word in an adwords ad on Google.  So, a person is searching Google for a pre-owned authentic Louis Vuitton Etoile- entering those terms in it's search- shouldn't find spondsored ad results that use those words.  Seems like there is a win/win solution out there somewhere...

I actually applaud Louis Vuitton's efforts in combatting counterfeits- and recognize that what they've done to control distribution has been fantastic in keeping their value and reputation high...  But brand owners also need to recognize that part of what makes a luxury item valuable (think not only bags, but jewels, or art or boats or houses) is the value that item has on the resale market.  Limiting the option of an owner to sell that piece down the road- is not good for the business and is restrictive for the owner.

Anyway... we'll see where this goes.  The 80,000 Euro fine may have been relatively small... but LVMH is sooo not done with them yet.  It looks like the Tribunal also made sure that eBay knew in no uncertain terms- that additional violations would result in a fine of 1,000 Euros per infringement.  eBay's now waiting on the results of a couple of Google cases that are in the courts now that may have an impact.

More from the NY TImes!

Attn: Fashionphiles in Indianapolis- don’t miss this!

Friday, September 18th, 2009

auctionbucket

Un-believable!!!!  If you're in the area... do NOT miss this crazy auction where the government is trying to get back some $2 million in evaded taxes from shop-a-holic Susan Ellis.  Susan can't do much about it- cause she's presently serving time down in Kentucky!!!

auctionvernisbucket

It's tomorrow at Earl's Auction Co in Indianapolis.  I've only included pictures of some bags here... and Louis Vuitton bags at that.  But there are literally probably 100 or so- bags (Chanel, Gucci, Fendi, Ferragamo, etc!), and more wallets and small pieces.

auctionwallets

But I'm not talking cheap small accessories & pouches... a few different LV French Purse wallets (mono, damier, vernis), the Portefeuille chain wallet, etc. etc.!

AMAZING!  All in very good- to brand new condition.  It's craziness.  All different brands, and styles...

auctionmininoe

And tons and tons of clothes- I'm talking brand new with tags $5000+ Chanel jackets etc.  Like a hundred or so.  It's craziness, and I only wish I could have been part of it :(

If you go... PLEASE tell me how it went!  Check here to browse the AMAZING pictures- LOADS of them!!!

Louis Vuitton’s shoe’s on the other foot…

Friday, September 11th, 2009

Louis Vuitton New Balance Sneaker dispute

We hear about Louis Vuitton's involvement in various intellectual property/ trademark infringement debates quite often- usually protecting their label against those scavengers who are violating their rights.

But looks like the sneaker's on the other foot this time.  New Balance shoe co. does NOT like how similar the just released $590 Louis Vuitton Minstrel sneaker is to the $70 New Balance 574.  In fact they don't like it enough that they just filed a lawsuit in Boston's U.S. District Court.

Apparently, New Balance has collaborated with stars and artists on various editions of the 574, and they fear people might just think this is another mash-up.  And that might be confusing to consumers...  The suit says,

“Indeed, it is possible that had New Balance authorized Louis Vuitton to design a special Louis Vuitton edition of the iconic New Balance 574 shoe, the Minstrel might have been a highly successful collaboration."

I know New Balance has just as much as a right as anyone to protect their rights... but there are definitely worse brands to be confused with- that's for sure!  Louis Vuitton understands and valued Intellectual Property more than anyone... and New Balance recognized this in the filings- and said they were confident that Louis Vuitton would make things right ASAP.

It's hard to say.  All of this style of sneaker look the same to me.  What do you think?  Confusingly similar?

Picture Credit:  Louis Vuitton & Football Casual

Chalk one up for eBay

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

eBay may have lost the Hermes case and the Louis Vuitton case and the Rolex case...  but it seems they've turned a corner.

After winning against Tiffany & Company here in the US last year, it looks like they've finally won their first case on French soil.  A French court ruled that eBay would not be held liable for the sale of fake L'Oreal on their site.  In fact, the court determined that eBay acted "in good faith" in its efforts to rid the marketplace of fakes.  The court suggested that rights owners and internet retailers attack the counterfeit problem in"'close collaboration".

It doesn't look liket L'Oreal's going to appeal the French ruling, but they've still got open lawsuits against eBay UK & Germany.

Hey, we want the fakes off the site as much as anyone.  But, come on luxury... sought after brands out there- you've got to recognize that the ability to resell what we buy benefits you in several ways.

1)  We'll pay more than we ordinarily would (we'll sell it later- it's an investment)

2)  Items with better resale value are thought to be more valuable

3)  If I can resell something that I bought a while ago, it frees up cash for me to be buy more
Read more about it at the Daily Mail

Zzzzzzzzz, snoozefest

Tuesday, December 23rd, 2008

Louis Vuitton Bullet Appropriation

What is it with "artists" using the Louis Vuitton monogram in weapons and ammunition?

Apparently, this was part of the communications campaign kit by design firm 21:19 for Bita Haidarian's autobiographical film, "Finding Bibi".  I'm just done with the whole, use the iconic Louis Vuitton logo on a bullet or gun to make a political statement.  It's been done OVER and OVER.

TI’s Rag’s in the Bag

Tuesday, October 21st, 2008

 TI Louis Vuitton Release Party(T.I. at his T.I. vs T.I.P. release party at LV Lenox Mall last year)

Looks like Louis Vuitton and Gucci didn't appreciate the exposure they were getting from the video for T.I.'s "Swing Ya Rag". In fact, they claimed infringment and put the kibosh on the whole thing...

The lyrics are all about "Louis" and "Gucci".  The chorus:

"Alright, okay, I don't dance, no way
I just take my Louis rag out and wave it round in the air
Take my Gucci rag out and wave it round in the air"

TI Swing Ya Rag Louis Vuitton(This is a screenshot from the making of the "Swing ya Rag" video.)

TI said about the song:

"It's self explanatory.  It's about swinging your Gucci rag or your Louis rag.  And, you know, I think I introduced that, I think I introduced that fashion trend to the world.  I do believe I was the first one, man you know what I'm saying, to tie a Gucci rag to my beltloop, man... match with your shirt... let it match with your shoes.  I do believe, if I'm not mistaken.  But. You know basically man, what we're going to with it man, we're going to represent the influence of Gucci and Louis Vuitton to the hood.  Not the influence that it has in Hollywood, we're all familiar with that.  I'm talking about the influence that Louis Vuitton and Gucci has had to the hood.  You know what I'm saying. When we wear it, how we wear it and why we wear it."

Tip (who along with Swizz Beatz produced the video) said to MTV:

"We did it, and it came out hot, Louis [Vuitton] and Gucci started trippin' about it. They were saying we were infringing, in one way or another. They weren't happy about it. They didn't want it to come out. "

So, it's not coming out.  And the blogs are ablaze about why LV lets some videos go, and others not.

All I have to say is- whether you're from the 'hood or the 'wood... we'd love to sell you some "rags"!  We've always got a great variety of pre-owned, authentic Louis Vuitton, Hermes, Gucci, Chanel- you name it scarves & bandanas.  Be sure to check it out!

Authentic Louis Vuitton Denim Scarf

Touché, eBay

Thursday, September 18th, 2008

eBay Louis Vuitton logo

So it looks like eBay isn't taking it's recent HUGE losses (against LVMH and Hermes) in Europe sitting down.

Tod Cohen, (Deputy General Counsel for eBay) has apparently asked the commissioner of Anti-trust issues in the European Union to look into some of these companies that are using tight (and arguably "anti-competitive" and  "abusive") distribution agreements to keep their products off of eBay.

Cohen contends that these companies' policies are "manipulating and controlling the markets beyond EU market rules".

Interesting quote from Neelie Kroes, European Union Competition Commissioner:

 

"There are a number of practices that are being used to restrict cross-border sales, which I think require a closer look.

Like I've always said, I back any companies' efforts to protect their good name and reputation.  eBay bears some responsibility in this- mainly in working closely with Trademark owners in keeping the market clean.  (They could do more- in requiring real verification for all users for starters!)  But they're doing a ton of what they can do.  What they aren't good at is combing through all of the listings for fakes.  This is where there needs to be coordination and cooperation with the Brand holders themselves.

The idea that a company can restrict my ability to resell any item that I have legitimately purchased, because they don't want it sold in an particular venue is just craziness.  I mean, so you buy a Mercedes from an authorized Mercedes dealership, and you are never allowed to resell your vehicle?  Come on!

That's what LVMH has done in France.  Let's say that I live in France and get J'Adore Dior perfume (Dior is owned by LVMH) for my birthday.  And let's just say that I'm also allergic to perfumes.  I am not allowed by LVMH or eBay since the decision earlier this year (unless Mr. Cohen's efforts prove victorious) to sell that perfume on eBay.

Let's just hope that at the very least that kind of nonsense doesn't get worse (more limitations... and more lawsuits), and at best that people will be able have full rights of resale to anything that they legally and lawfully buy with their hard earned money.

Can't these companies see how limiting resale reduces the value of their luxury brands?

Read more from Retail Week.

Louis Vuitton v. City Chain

Wednesday, September 17th, 2008

Louis Vuitton Cty Chain Watch

Louis Vuitton isn't kicking back in its efforts to get rid of counterfeits and knock-offs that violate their trademark.

You can see a watch above made by City Chain under its Solvil name.  And you can also see the logos that Louis Vuitton has taken issue with.

Anyway, they're battling it out now in Singapore.  Louis Vuitton claiming all the usual: their rights to the trademark, similarity in symbols, dilution of the market, the likelihood of confusion between the two, the reputation of the brand, and damage to exclusivity etc.

City Chain's claiming that they aren't using trademarked logos- just designs... and their name is clearly imprinted on each piece.  They also say that their prices are so different (low) to Louis Vuitton's as to make their customers unique (no comfusion or dilution).

Interesting stuff... read the Strait Times for more info.

Picture Credit:  LV Tambour- Eluxury, Solviv- Lianhe Zaoboa, Strait Times

Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

Bad Behavior has blocked 1870 access attempts in the last 7 days.