• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • 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
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
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.

Issues

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

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Daily Blog, Featured, Trademark

Sole Struck

Submitted by Melissa Grosett on January 27, 2013 – 6:58 PM6637One Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2013%2F01%2F27%2Fsole-struck%2FSole+Struck2013-01-27+23%3A58%3A45Melissa+Grosetthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6637

Red-Soled Shoes by Yves Saint Laurent and Christian LouboutinA final order for the Christian Louboutin v. Yves Saint Laurent case has been rendered by a New York District court. The court already ruled that Louboutin’s trademark only protected red-soled shoes with contrasting uppers, therefore allowing the sale of YSL’s all red monochromatic shoes. This led to YSL filing a countersuit, which YSL counsel chose to abandon in October. On December 27, 2012, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a final order acknowledging that Louboutin did not have further claims against Yves Saint Laurent. YSL representatives stated that,  “YSL is pleased to see now completely closed this action that had put at risk the ability of fashion designers to trademark color, as well as to now have confirmation from the Court that it is entitled to continue to sell its unique and famous monochromatic red shoes.”

The final decision only came in a month ago but it seems as though celebrities made their final judgment long ago.  Designer Diane von Furstenberg was open about her support for Louboutin in this matter and Tiffany & Co. filed a legal brief in October to support Louboutin (although this may have been a preemptive strike to protect their trademarked shade of blue).

Dhani Mau noted that both parties seem to have won since Louboutin got its trademark and YSL is able to sell their shoe.  Hopefully both parties will look at the situation this way as well and the fashion world can continue to do what they do best.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Melissa Grosett

Melissa is a 1L at American University Washington College of Law serving as a Junior Blogger for the Intellectual Property Brief. She graduated from SUNY Stony Brook University in May 2012 where she received a B.S. in Business Management and a B.A. in Psychology. In undergrad, she served as the Manager of her school's Division 1 football team and as the President of the National Association of Black Accountants. At WCL, she serves as her section's Black Law Students Association representative and is a member of the Business Law Society. Her interests include intellectual property law, corporate law, and sports law.

Melissa Grosett has written 6 posts for the IPB.

6637One Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2013%2F01%2F27%2Fsole-struck%2FSole+Struck2013-01-27+23%3A58%3A45Melissa+Grosetthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6637 »

  • Gonzalo Gutierrez says:
    February 20, 2013 at 4:02 PM

    Well hopefully that will happen but in reality I'm sure they'll find anything at this point to try and sue each other for some trademark design or whatever, if they did it for the color of a shoe then they can do it just about anything, becoming an incredible waste of time for both parties.

    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 »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Shortly after the oral arguments between Monsanto and Bowman, WCL hosted both parties for a post argument discussion. Recently the Supreme Court ruled on the case, requiring annual purchases of Monsanto’s soybeans.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?

Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?

Following the explosions on April 15, “Boston Strong” emerged as a viral hashtag on Twitter, a rallying cry at public events, and a logo on all kinds of apparels. It does not take too long for business opportunists to take advantage of this national tragedy.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
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 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • 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

Rethinking Performance Royalties for Sound Recordings Exploitation or Just the Game? The NCAA, Collegiate Athletes, and Video Games Short Circuit: February 10 - 22, 2013 Flava Works, Inc. v. Gunter: Spreading Infringing Content Without Liability Oats, Peas, Beans, and Patents Grow Subway: That’s Our “Footlong” Obama Creates IP Enforcement Advisory Committees Rule Britannia: UK Court of Appeals Orders Costs against Apple after it Published “False and Misleading Statements” About its Loss in the Ongoing Samsung v. Apple Litigation. ‘Redskins’ Trademark Cancellation Bill Sent to Congress Twitter, Facebook, and the CSA: a Strange Story of Conservatism Apple Denied Rights to “Multi-Touch” Copyright in Football: Is it Practicable?
(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

  • Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?
  • Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business
  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • 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