WWD’s reporting that Louis Vuitton won another big one.

Apparently, Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein was hoping to make a statement with his $3.5 million award in favor of Louis Vuitton.  He said, “Defendants have shown by their willfulness in obstructing this litigation and violating plaintiffs’ trademark rights that a slight damage award is unlikely to deter them from continuing their illegal business.”

Hopefully this will deter Joyce Chan and Chong Lam from continuing their business selling counterfeit handbags that infringed upon Louis Vuitton’s trademarks.  But who knows.  From a Reuter’s article earlier this year (at the time of their arrest), it looks like they’d benefitted to the tune of $16 million from their sales of fake Louis Vuitton, Gucci, Chanel and Coach.

Picture Credit:  WWD

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

No… not that one.  The bag above is the amazing, authentic special order Mon Monogram Speedy that fellow blogger F~A~L~B introduced to the world in mid June of this year.  But follow me here- this is an unreal story!

If you aren’t familiar with Louis Vuitton’s Mon Monogram- it is a special Speedy 30 that you can customize with your choice of 2-3 initials and vertical or diagonal stripes in 16 possible colors.  These options leave the variety and possibilities almost endless! 

So I was sooooo interested in the most recent post on F~A~L~B’s In LVOE with Louis Vuitton blog.  It seems that since F~A~L~B’s pictures of his Mon Mono were the first to hit the web- those where the pictures that the counterfeiters used to produce their fakes of this bag… right–down–to–the–color–and–choice–of–initials–to–the–color–of–the–stripes.

I guess the brilliant fakers thought “FB” stood for “fabulous bag” or “freaking beautiful”?

Check it out:

So sad.

I used to not think that big-time counterfeiters paid much attention to info/pictures they found on the web.  The fakes today are so close to the original, that I just figured, they’re buying a real one- ripping it apart and copying it.  But this just goes to show…

Read the story from his blog.  And be shocked.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I always got a kick out of his “Worst Person in the World” segment in Countdown with Keith Olbermann.  And when I saw this article, I immediately thought… this is for sure, this week’s “Worst Article in the World”.

Go ahead, check out the Examiner.com article written by Kelly Saxton Lindner, the “Dallas High Society Examiner”.  Wow.  There is nothing high society about what Kelly advocates.

The article is called, “Five ways to get good fake designer handbags.”

I’m not going to get into all of the lowlights of the article, but Kelly, honey- fakes are not only tacky and cheap looking (trust me- more people know than you think) but they support a lot of really yucky and scary stuff***.   Carrying them just isn’t honest.

The “Louis Vuitton Looping MM” pictured in the Examiner article is not authentic.  The monogram alignment is wrong, the monogram is flipped near the zipper- so the LVs are laying horizontally (where they shouldn’t be showing at all- and for sure not aligned that way), the zipper pull isn’t shaped correctly and neither is the strap.

If you’re looking for a Louis Vuitton handbag for less than retail- don’t buy a fake- buy pre-owned.  While the Monogram Looping MM costs $1030 from the Boutique or eLuxury.com, we have authentic pre-owned Louis Vuitton monogram Looping MM bags on our website for anywhere from less than a third of that- only $325, to $550.

Buying pre-owned authentic bags, you’ll not only save some money, but you can hold your head high carrying a bag that you love, knowing you’ve made an authentic choice, and a “green” one, to boot!  Win, win, win!

***  A little background reading:

BBC:  Fake Goods Linked to Terrorism

Times Online:  Designer Fakes ‘are funding Al-Qaeda’

IHT:  Counterfeit goods are linked to terrorism

Harper’s Bazaar:  Fakes are never in fashion

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Beyond the obvious, of course (ya know- the whole, funding terrorism thing, etc. etc.).

The Purse Party of No Return: Louis Vuitton Brouhaha Leaves One Injured, Two in Jail

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Uh… yeah.  So bizarre.  Not the concept of using the Louis Vuitton trademark logos on automatic weapons- that’s been done to death.  What’s bizarre to me, is how similar the “new” Justin Melnick “ARM ME” exhibition is in comparison with Peter Gronquiest’s The Revolution will be Fabulous- A Weapons of Mass Designer Show in LA just a couple months ago.  I mean, is it possible that Justin’s “images” are pictures of Peter’s work?  Take a look:

From Justin’s exhibition:

From Peter’s:

The fact is that the whole thing bugs me on several levels.

First, it’s just not clever.  Sure, it’s disguised as clever, but it’s just not.  It’s the oldest, easiest trick in the book.  Use Louis Vuitton (and other luxury label’s good names) obviously without their permission and on something ugly and controversial.  Quick money.

Such a direct copy of an already lousy concept just demonstrates a lack of imagination.  It’s just not impressive at all- and again- actually is only remotely interesting considering the irony and the real battles that Louis Vuitton et. al wage with people copying them everyday.

Don’t get me wrong- I think Peter’s work is just as bad.  He’s clearly using illegally manufactured counterfeit scarves and unlicensed fabrics (you can see in closeups that these pieces aren’t painted- but use glued on fabric) to produce these “pieces of art” (and I use that phrase loosely).  All this does is perpetuate the very problem that both exhibitions are meant to make statements on.  Read articles on the connection between counterfeits and terrorism HERE and HERE.

Just my opinion.  And I can tell from all over the web, that there are a lot of folks out there impressed and entertained by Justin & Peter’s work.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I mean… when will people learn.  Louis Vuitton REALLY doesn’t like it when people use their marks without their permission.

So there’s this kind of clever game out there called Fakes for Real.  It includes 60 cards and is a “Memory” style game where you match up pairs.  But, instead of being matched sets of two- there is a real card matched with its fake.  So… the real Mona Lisa and a repro,  Bavaria’s Neuschwanstein castle and Sleeping Beauty’s Disneyland castle, the Villa Rotonda and its look-a-like “the White House”, an aerial picture of downtown Toronto and one from the computer game The Sims.  I actually really like the concept!

However, the box and packaging are clearly inspired by the Louis Vuitton trademark logo pointed quatrefoils as well as the overall multicolore dress.

It’s temporarily offline- and here’s what the www.fakeforreal.com website looks like right now:

Ha!  I totally LOVE what they did to most of the offending marks game in that pic:

Anyway… I mean, I get it.  A game of fakes and they’re using the logos of the most historically faked brand satirically.  But that’s just the problem.   Louis Vuitton doesn’t want to be associated with anything counterfeit… let alone a game of fakes.  (And quite frankly, they are vigilant in quashing the unauthorized use of their marks at all.  Remember Britney, Ruben Studdard, Da Brat, BMG and the infamous Darfur shirt?)

Here’s an interesting read about it.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Ouch… a Paris Court ordered eBay to pay $63 million in damages to Louis Vuitton for negligence in allowing the sales of counterfeit Louis Vuitton on the website.  (Read more about it here…)

You have to hand it to Louis Vuitton.  They got the job done.  They single handedly lit a fire under the figurative backside of eBay Inc, and got them to do what needed so much to be done… to clean up the marketplace.

The court decision makes so much sense to me… and obviously eBay is appealing, but the fake situation on eBay was SO bad for SO long… it’s not shocking that the courts would lay down a heavy hand.

Let’s face it.  eBay has made a lot, and I mean a LOT of money on the sale of counterfeit goods on their site.  (I’m estimating on average eBay sells about 16,000 Louis Vuitton items a month at an average sales price of $375 with average start prices of $175.  That makes the average fee for Louis Vuitton items at about $17.  Multiply that times 192,000 items a year… and we’re looking at $3.8 million in fees annually for the LV brand alone.  LV’s claim of 90% fake on eBay was probably about right until the big overhaul in fall 2006… so you do the math.)

I mean, we (putting myself with the collective community of online shoppers to whom authenticity absolutely essential) had been almost badgering eBay for years and years to do something… and yet the situation on eBay just literally got worse and worse. The countless fakes, the one day auctions, the zero feedback seller with 50 NWT LV listings, the fake second chance offers, the $75 BINs for $1000 bags.  I mean, now we ask where all the buyers have gone?

They said that nothing more could be done- they were doing all they could, they’re just a venue, yada, yada, yada.  A few years ago, I could go through a whole page of Louis Vuitton listings on eBay and literally not find a single authentic bag.

That is not the situation now.  The vast majority of Louis Vuitton listings on eBay today are authentic.

So if eBay was just a venue, and was doing all they could do… what happened?

Tiffany & Co and Louis Vuitton sued.  eBay woke up.  They turned on the lights, swept the place out, cleaned the place up, batten down the hatches and locked the doors.

It was hard for all of us to adjust at first, but eBay has taken the right first steps to improve the atmosphere and the trust level that we all needed in a platform to be able to sell authentic luxury goods online.

eBay now monitors closely brands that are frequently counterfeited.  There are restrictions on how long you have to be selling on the site to list those brands, and how many you can list at once.  There is particular wording watched for that gives red flags that a listing may be fraudulent.  Brands that are watched don’t get listed immediatley, but go through and overview process for up to 10 hours before they hit the site.

eBay has come a long way, baby!

So I’m fine with the damages awarded by the Parisian Court…

What is frightening part to me:

Part of that ruling includes payment of 3.25 million Euros to Christian Dior, Givenchy, Kenzo and Guerlain for allowing perfume to be sold outside of the “authorized network”.

The result of this part of the decision is that eBay is completely barred from listing these cosmetic and perfume brands on its site PERIOD.

eBay’s “official response”:

“Today’s ruling is not about our fight against counterfeits; today’s ruling is about an attempt by LVMH to protect uncompetitive commercial practices at the expense of consumer choice and the livelihood of law-abiding sellers that EBay empowers everyday,” EBay said in an e-mailed statement. “We will fight this ruling on their behalf.”

Yipes?  So I get J’adore Dior perfume for my birthday and never use it (which I did, and I don’t… it’s just not my favorite).  I now can’t list it on eBay because I am not a member of the authorized distribution network for Christian Dior?

Hmmm… got to get back to you when I look into this more.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The Louis Vuitton v. eBay decision that is.  It should be here on the 30th- tomorrow that is.

Are you ready?

After that amazing Candadian decision- $1 million for a fairly small fashion store (with only a couple locations)… and the $30,000 eBay had to pay Hermes last month after a decision against them in a French court for allowing 3 (yes, three) fake Hermes on the site…  I’m DYING to hear what the French Courts are going to say in the Louis Vuitton lawsuit against eBay Inc.

Louis Vuitton, et al, is seeking 51 million Euro ($80 MILLION) in damages for negligence and the illicit sales of counterfeit bags on their site.

(As an aside- as someone who’s been on eBay since 1999, I will say that eBay has done a pretty good job in the last couple years at getting, I’d estimate 95% LESS fake Louis Vuitton listed on the site than they did years ago…

There was a day when the vast, vast majority of the Louis Vuitton bags listed on the site were fake.  Now, the opposite is true.)

This is the part that scares me…

Part of the decision will answer perfume brands Dior, Guerlain, Givenchy and Kenzo who have an issue with eBay even when they allow AUTHENTIC goods to be listed.  They claim that even this is illegal because these companies hold tight control on their distribution chains and ONLY permit specialist, authorized dealers to sell their goods.

I can’t wait…

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Sounds easy enough, but after my last post about the Monogram Manhattan PM picture issue, I got an email asking me to check out a Louis Vuitton Multicolore Manhattan PM.  “Is this authentic?”

It’s a simple rule.  If Louis Vuitton never made a particular style bag in a particular “skin”- then it is just not authentic.  For example, the Manhattan PM is a monogram line bag… only.  It has never been made in any other line.  So, if you see a damier, MC, epi, denim etc. Manhattan PM- it’s fake.

(Caveat- this rule doesn’t apply with special order items.  You can special order many styles in skins that are not available to the general public.  These bags are very expensive to have made- and you won’t find them for $79 - or even $379- on the internet.)

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Wow.  This could end up being costly to eBay.

It looks like a French court found eBay guilty of selling three counterfeit Hermes handbags and ordered them (and the woman who listed the bags) to pay $30,000 dollars in damages to Hermes.  Not only that- but (and this is my favorite part of the ruling)… they are required to POST the ruling on the eBay France website for three months!!!

Hermes attorney’s went for it bigtime, and weren’t mincing words.  Attorney Emmanuel Colomes said of eBay,

“We are satisfied that they should be considered counterfeiters”

 And apparently, the court agreed.  The ruling said:

“By selling Hermes bags and branded accessories on the eBay.fr site, and by failing to act within their powers to prevent reprehensible use of the site,” (the woman who listed the fakes and eBay) “committed acts of counterfeiting and imitation of French brand names … to the detriment of Hermes international,”

Hmmm….  This just makes me think of the ongoing Tiffany & Company and Louis Vuitton v. eBay cases.   Tiffany & Co. is a US case, I believe.  But, LV also filed in France.  French courts are MUCH more protective of the rights owners and distribution rights etc. of players in the fashion industry than we are here in the US.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!