Christian Louboutin sues Yves Saint Laurent over shoe soles *Update* Loses

[LegsXI]

What a joke! I can't believe Loub has actually got a patent for A COLOUR.

 

[Squizree]

It's only on the soles though.

 

[rayoflight]

I actually feel for YSL, that someone might confuse their shoes with Louboutin's. Gross. YSL will never recover from that disgrace.

I find the judge a bit ******** as well, Louboutin says their's is 'a bright, lacquered red', nothing else. To me it didn't look like Ysl's soles were that color (much lighter), and they didn't look lacquered (more like matte), so WTF? Absurd.

 

[advo]

^I agree. The colour on the YSL shoes are not the same as LB's shade of red so it's pretty much BS on that part.

Nevertheless, this was the expected result. LB had the patent so this is the law. Ridiculous, but it is what it is.

 

[LegsXI]

Well I mean the patent is understandable for say a shoe company making knock offs of Loubs trying to pass them off as Loubs with the red sole but obviously that's not what YSL were aiming for...

 

[Spike413]

Good for Loub. Revisiting this thread has made me realize just how foolish - and tacky - YSL was on their part to ever release the red-soled shoe. Honestly even without Louboutin's patent it still would have likely sparked some kind of controversy, probably from the same kinds of people who are writing this lawsuit off as ridiculous - observant fashion fans.

Either way it would have been bad press for YSL.

 

[TianSoFine]

^Even before news of the lawsuit came out, I don't think anyone was bothered that the soles of red YSL shoes were red.

 

[NakedIfIWantTo]

Well I guess the judge must be a fan of Loubs.

 

[Spike413]

^Even before news of the lawsuit came out, I don't think anyone was bothered that the soles of red YSL shoes were red.

Likely because nobody noticed them since they weren't a shoe that had "presence" so to speak, but as soon as someone did notice do you really think that the blogosphere wouldn't have latched on to that story?

 

[GivenchyHomme]

YSL will never outsell Louboutin. It's ridiculous to even assume that they hold any power or competition against them. I'm pretty sure the intended Louboutin customer is intelligent enough to differentiate a Louboutin to any other Red Soled Shoe.

 

[TianSoFine]

^^No, I really don't think that because the whole shoe was a certain colour and their were other single-coloured shoes in the collection. It wasn't something that made people immediately thought was Louboutin because of that fact and it wasn't anything noteworthy.

 

[Spike413]

^ To you perhaps, but as someone else in the thread said (I think it was mikeijames), anyone who sees a red-soled high heel from any kind of distance would automatically assume it's a Louboutin because of the fact that red soles are synonymous with his name and his line.

And I stand by what I said that if this wasn't pointed out because of the suit it would only have been a matter of time before someone out there noticed it and pointed out the obvious similarity to Louboutin's signature soles.

 

[chloesaab]

can CL be any more ridiculous pfftt

 

[mikeijames]

honestly, i don't see why ysl doesn't just settle this thing quietly at this point. they would have sued monsieur louboutin if he had made even one pair of shoes that resembled their precious -- and best selling -- tribute line of products.

 

[advo]

^But that's not the same. Then they would have intentionally knocked off a design.

While the law is what it is, since the patent was given in the first place, then yes, "justice" was served. By I stand by the ridiculous of it all and I disagree that YSL shoes would have lead to designer confusion. Like someone upthread remarked, YSL red shoes are red all over. Hence the red sole. Only people who knows about Loubs - and that isn't the whole world - knows red sole = Loubs. But frankly, who knew that Loubs had a trademark on red soles? And if that is not common knowledge why would they expect that a red shoe with a red sole is necessarily a design by Loubs? Trademarks are supposed to fight imitation competition and encourage innovation, I fail to see that in this case.

 

[GivenchyHomme]

Here's an Update

Judge Victor Marrero has ruled to deny Christian Louboutin's request for a preliminary injunction that would prevent YSL from selling the red-soled shoes from its 2011 resort collection. He wrote in his ruling:

Because in the fashion industry color serves ornamental and aesthetic functions vital to robust competition, the court finds that Louboutin is unlikely to be able to prove that its red outsole brand is entitled to trademark protection, even if it has gained enough public recognition in the market to have acquired secondary meaning.

When reached for comment, Louboutin's lawyer, Harley Lewin of McCarter & English LLP, stated:

We are profoundly disappointed in Judge Marrero’s decision. Although we are still studying it, it appears he has decided that in the fashion industry, one color should not serve as a trademark. While he acknowledges the fashion industry at large has recognized the Louboutin Red Sole as a trademark source indicator, he has concluded that the fashion industry needs to use colors on outsoles without restriction and this, despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary, including a recent decision by the 2nd Panel of Appeal at OAMI in the EU that concluded exactly the opposite, calling Mr. Louboutin’s adoption of the bright red outsole brilliant. We will evaluate all the alternatives available in the days to come.

Meanwhile, YSL's lawyer, David Bernstein of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, says:

We're gratified that Judge Marrero has agreed with YSL that no designer should be allowed to monopolize a single color for an article of apparel. As Judge Marrero indicated, YSL designers are artists and, like other artists, they should have the right to use the full palette of colors in designing their fashions for each season.

As YSL has noted from the start, this is a trademark registration that never should have issued, and we are pleased that Judge Marrero has agreed that the registration likely should be cancelled.

In other words, this isn't over yet.

via, thecut

 

[advo]

^THANK GOD the judge agreed that a trademark for a sole colour is ridiculous!

IF the trademark registration holds, then I see a settlement. If it doesn't hold, YSL will get off scout-free.

 

[Label Basher]

So did the judge change his mind?

 

[advo]

^No.

The judge dismissed YSL' "evidence" that they have been producing shoes with red soles from 2004 - I guess, the evidence was supposed to support YSL's claim that Loub had been fraudulent in his trademark application claim. The judge has ruled in YSL' favour (regarding the preliminary injunction) but the case is probably not over yet since Loub sued YSL for damages.

 

[Label Basher]

^ Then why was it orginally reported (which i posted on the previous page) that the judge had sided with CL?

Did I not read it right and there was two issues. One sided with CL the other with YSL.