• Home
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
  • Symposium
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Video

Blog posts featuring video clips.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Home » Daily Blog, Featured, Trademark

Trademark Issue Over a Red Shoe

Submitted by Caroline Gousse on April 10, 2011 – 8:45 AM30463 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2011%2F04%2F10%2Ftrademark-issue-over-a-red-shoe%2FTrademark+Issue+Over+a+Red+Shoe2011-04-10+13%3A45%3A25Caroline+Goussehttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D3046

The Red ShoesAs I was a very young girl still holding my father’s hand while walking in the streets of Paris, it happened that my father and I passed by Christian Louboutin’s little shop on rue de Grenelle. My father, eager to find tangible evidence that his daughter was a genius, tried to test my observation skills in asking one simple question: “Caroline, what do you see in this shop that is common to every single shoe on display?”

For those of you who do not know about Christian Louboutin and dread the same insidious question, the answer is: shoes by designer Christian Louboutin all have red soles. For those of you who, like my father, are appalled by my lack of observation skills as a child, I will simply point out that fashion experts can also easily overlook Louboutin’s trademark.

Fashion blogs and newspapers have relayed information that Yves St. Laurent is infringing on Louboutin’s trademark in selling shoes that have a similarly red sole. The Manhattan District Court will have to decide whether the new “Palais,” cute little pumps by Yves St. Laurent, are infringing material.  Louboutin filed a complaint in which the designer is asking for $1 million in damages.

Louboutin argues that painting soles in rouge laqué has been his trademark since 1992 and has become a distinctive sign of Louboutin products. Further, Louboutin’s complaint states, “Defendants’ use of red footwear outsoles that are virtually identical to plaintiffs’ Red Sole Mark is likely to cause and is causing confusion, mistake and deception among the relevant purchasing public.”

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office awarded Louboutin a trademark on red-sole shoes in 2008. Still, Louboutin will have to prove that the likelihood of confusion criterion is met. The similarity between the overall impressions of the two brands may be argued, as well as the similarity between the goods themselves. Both designers have a long-standing reputation of being top fashion designers. Yves St. Laurent is iconic for sure, and Louboutin’s shoes are hallowed by a substantial part of fashion lovers. The marketing channels for those shoes, as well as the physical proximity of the retail marketplaces (Yves St. Laurent’s litigious pumps are available at Saks Fifth Avenue, Barneys New York and Bergdorf Goodman) will both be important points of contention. However, I personally think that the specific intent of Yves St. Laurent to adopt the red-sole pattern and invade Louboutin’s market is not established in view of the already most commanding reputation of Yves St. Laurent in the world Haute-Couture.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Caroline Goussé

Caroline is an international J.D. student at American University Washington College of Law. After receiving a dual bachelor of law in French and Common Law from the University of Paris Nanterre, she pursued a Master’s Degree in French and American Comparative Law while concurrently seeking a J.D. in the United States. She is currently in her last year for both programs. She has a strong interest in intellectual property, particularly in copyright, and is a regular contributor to the Intellectual Property Brief. In addition, she finds the comparison between common and civil law exciting, and hopes to cultivate a career that merges her love for intellectual property with her international focus.

Caroline Goussé has written 29 posts for the IPB.

30463 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2011%2F04%2F10%2Ftrademark-issue-over-a-red-shoe%2FTrademark+Issue+Over+a+Red+Shoe2011-04-10+13%3A45%3A25Caroline+Goussehttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D3046 »

  • @ericperrott says:
    April 10, 2011 at 11:56 AM

    It is interesting that this is being brought in a U.S. federal court – are these both French companies? Great post – I love the personality in your writing.

    Reply to this comment »
    • Caroline Gousse says:
      April 11, 2011 at 1:52 PM

      Both Louboutin and Yves St. Laurent / PPR are French companies indeed, but I believe the suit is brought against the American branch of Yves St. Laurent / PPR.

      Reply to this comment »
  • Trademark Issue Over a Red Shoe – American University Intellectual Property Brief | Shoe Club USA says:
    April 13, 2011 at 6:32 AM

    [...] Trademark Issue Over a Red ShoeAmerican University Intellectual Property BriefFashion blogs and newspapers have relayed information that Yves St. Laurent is infringing on Louboutin's trademark in selling shoes that have a similarly red sole. The Manhattan District Court will have to decide whether the new “Palais,” cute little …Christian Louboutin goes toe-to-toe with YSL in court for 'copying …Daily MailLouboutin sues YSL over red solesExaminer.comChristian Louboutin Sues Yves Saint Laurent Over Red SolesNBC New York (blog)Management Today -Telegraph.co.uk -Spicezeeall 408 news articles » [...]

    Reply to this comment »

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Piracy, Pornography and Conspiracy: How Judges Are Standing Up to Copyright Trolls

Piracy, Pornography and Conspiracy:  How Judges Are Standing Up to Copyright Trolls

In an attempt to secure large settlements from as many parties as possible, the adult entertainment industry has been joining individuals from the same district who illegally downloaded the same film in a single claim as co-conspirators. This enables them to discover Doe-defendants’ identities and get them to settle rather than be a party in a pornography suit. It worked for a while, but there is a problem, the defendants aren’t co-conspirators.

More articles »

Patents »

The Federal Circuit Defers to the Lower Court, Invalidates Social Networking Patent

The Federal Circuit Defers to the Lower Court, Invalidates Social Networking Patent

Yesterday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a jury verdict invalidating Leader Technologies, Inc.’s patent on an online networking system. A reversal may have put Facebook in jeopardy.

More articles »

Trademark »

Fake Coachella Merchandise Banned at the Festival

Fake Coachella Merchandise Banned at the Festival

This year’s Coachella music festival has its share of intellectual property issues. Attorneys for the festival have recently cracked down on counterfeit goods and asked a federal court judge to issue a preliminary injunction against certain vendors.

More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

Paging Lime Wire: The Copyright Battle Needs a Few More Definitions Lara Croft: Copyright Infringer? Copyright Group Gets Ready For New Wave Of Lawsuits Spanish Court Rules in Favor of YouTube in Copyright Case Taking a Bite Out of the Apple: “Appstore” Trademark Infringement Update RIAA Makes Move On LimeWire Fundraising Video Created by Ten Year Old for Children’s Hospice Falls Under Copyright Scrutiny Capturing Clouds: Intellectual Property Issues Within the Live Entertainment Production Process Target’s Expansion Into Canada Stymied by Prior Trademark Holder Netflix Raises Prices: The Never-Ending Saga of Internet Downloads and Other Developments in Online Content
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • The Federal Circuit Defers to the Lower Court, Invalidates Social Networking Patent
  • Piracy, Pornography and Conspiracy: How Judges Are Standing Up to Copyright Trolls
  • DVD Pirate Supports Troops, America, Freedom
  • Fake Coachella Merchandise Banned at the Festival
  • Video(game) Killed the Radio Star: EMI Sues Def Jam Over Video Game’s Unlicensed Use of Rap Songs

Twitter

  • The Federal Circuit Defers to the Lower Court, Invalidates Social Networking Patent - http://t.co/QW9iUbfT by Jonathan Stroud
  • Piracy, Pornography and Conspiracy: How Judges Are Standing Up to Copyright Trolls - http://t.co/xnT2pBGn by Kate Collins
  • DVD Pirate Supports Troops, America, Freedom - http://t.co/6kcnsWFW by Carrie Sager
  • Fake Coachella Merchandise Banned at the Festival - http://t.co/flRRpGJe by Alexandra Mackey
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License