• 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 » Articles, Columns, Copyright, Daily Blog, Featured

Riding on the Coattails of Ralph Lauren’s Horseman Logo Gets Bumpy

Submitted by Brooke Olaussen on February 21, 2013 – 11:10 AM6798No Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2013%2F02%2F21%2Friding-on-the-coattails-of-ralph-laurens-horseman-logo-gets-bumpy%2FRiding+on+the+Coattails+of+Ralph+Lauren%E2%80%99s+Horseman+Logo+Gets+Bumpy2013-02-21+16%3A10%3A43Brooke+Olaussenhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6798

PoloIt appears Ralph Lauren is just as good at fashioning its trademark as it is at fashioning apparel. This past week the Second Circuit upheld a district court’s dismissal and permanent injunction of the United States Polo Association’s (USPA) use of its double-horseman logo in conjunction with the word “polo” on fragrance bottles. The court found that the use of the USPA’s mark on fragrance products would likely cause confusion with Ralph Lauren’s fragrance line.

The Ralph Lauren logo and the USPA’s logo are shockingly similar. Given that the USPA has been around since 1890 as the official organizing body of the polo sport, and that Polo Ralph Lauren sprung onto the scene and into window displays circa 1968, one might think that the late blooming Ralph Lauren copied the USPA’s logo as a way to associate itself with the allure of polo. While RL probably did choose a horseman logo to evoke whatever cultural associations polo had garnered in the late 60s, it did not copy the USPA’s logo. It appears that the USPA copied Ralph Lauren’s logo after the company developed its goodwill with consumers. Ralph Lauren trademarked its logo in 1971, three years after the company’s launch.  The USPA introduced a new logo, the double-horseman, around 1981 – a good deal of time after its inception in 1890.

The legal disputes between Ralph Lauren and the USPA started in 1984 when Ralph Lauren claimed the USPA’s marketing of clothing products bearing the double-horseman logo infringed on Ralph Lauren’s trademark. The USPA in turn opposed Ralph Lauren’s attempt at trademarking the horseman logo by itself, without any accompanying words. The 1984 opinion opted for compromise: it allowed the USPA to continue using its double-horseman logo on apparel but enjoined it from using its name or mark in a way likely to cause confusion with Ralph Lauren’s marks.

Not surprisingly, this decision has led to many more lawsuits. This most recent decision by the second circuit bars the USPA from marketing a fragrance line with its double-horseman logo with the words “polo” or “polo since 1890” underneath. The court rejected the USPA’s argument that the 1984 decision allowing the USPA to use its logo on apparel barred Ralph Lauren from claiming the USPA’s use of its logo on fragrance products infringed Ralph Lauren’s marks; apparel is one market sector and fragrance is another. The court found the similarity of the proposed fragrance line to Ralph Lauren’s fragrance products and the USPA’s history of bad faith infringement weighed in favor of upholding the permanent injunction.

It appears that the Second Circuit’s decision is saying that if the USPA uses its double-horseman mark without also using its word mark “United States Polo Association” or “USPA,” it will be infringing on Ralph Lauren’s mark. There it is. Ralph Lauren has won the branding war over the polo logo. The USPA’s proposed fragrance bottle does sound cool, especially with “polo since 1890” or just “1890” underneath the double-horseman logo, but that’s the problem – the USPA is trying to find appeal from somewhere other than its word mark, yet its efforts end up looking too much like Ralph Lauren when the USPA uses its double-horseman logo. It’s understandable that the USPA would like to sex up its brand with chic logo-emblazoned items, but it can’t do that by trying to ride on the coattails of Ralph Lauren’s horseman logo. It’s time for the USPA to reconsider its target market and redo its logo.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Brooke Olaussen

Brooke Olaussen is a 2L at WCL with an interest in IP law, international law, and contract law. She has a B.A. from Wesleyan University where she studied American history, film, and creative writing. Brooke is a staff member of the Business Law Review. In her free time she enjoys movies, music, and travel.

Brooke Olaussen has written 6 posts for the IPB.

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 »

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme, one of the most coveted skate-inspired clothing brands, is suing women’s clothing brand Married to the Mob and its founder Leah McSweeney for trademark infringement to the tune of $10 million.

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

Righthaven Still Bullying Bloggers Into Settlements While Maybe Lacking Standing to Sue Charlie Sheen Attempts to Trademark Over 20 Catch Phrases? Park Your Nonsense!  #WINNING Trademark Issue Over a Red Shoe The Absence of Common Sense from the Copyright Act’s Treatment of Software and the First Sale Doctrine Trademarkia Tries to Simplify the Trademark Application Process Medicines Patent Pool Receives First HIV Drug Licenses from Pharmaceutical Company Angry College Athletes Sue Videogame Company For Using Their Image New First-To-File-Rules – They’re Good For Small Businesses and How to Prepare So You Can Take Advantage of Them. Towards a Doctrine of Fair Use in Some of Patent Law Short Circuit: August 1 - 15, 2012 Testing American Diplomacy as to International IP Protection: What Will Become of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement? MGA Accuses Mattel of Toy Espionage Taiwan Relaxes Law Limiting Uses of Government-Owned IP Woman Accused of Violating Royal British Legion Poppy Trademark
(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

  • 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
  • Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

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