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

[Zarina]

Someone who knows Louboutin is known for the red soles would also be able to distinguish YSL design from CL design - even if both shoes have red soles.
What if someone would trademark the little black dress?

 

[fashionista-ta]

L B D®

 

[AD122915]

I also agree with others... Other designers used colourful soles too and did not get sued... so why so suddenly?
This is Versace FW06 for instance, every single shoe had purple sole


thecelebritycity.com

 

[AD122915]

And entire Versace SS08 collection had red soles too... isn't this Lou's patent too? if yes, why didnt they sue them back then?


thecelebritycity.com

 

[Label Basher]

^ I guess we can assume it's because Versace's soles weren't red they were purple and to me SS08 looks more orange (could be the lighting). YSL had blue once and Loub didn't say anything about that. It's all about the red.

 

[fashionista-ta]

I noticed in Cesare Paciotti's fall campaign that they suddenly have a red sole with a black print (looks quite odd). Possibly the black print says Christian Louboutin threatened us with a big bad lawsuit if you get close enough to read it And Ferragamo has a b&w houndstooth on their soles. Where will it all end

 

[neonsprinkles]

Someone who knows Louboutin is known for the red soles would also be able to distinguish YSL design from CL design - even if both shoes have red soles.
What if someone would trademark the little black dress?

Exactly.
Might as well trademark "The New Look" too.

This entire situation sounds like a petty kid who wants his candy back.

 

[rosalynn]

Definitely, and it's embarrassing and disillusioning people like me who actually like Louboutins (admittedly not the last two seasons...)

 

[fashionista-ta]

Exactly.
Might as well trademark "The New Look" too.

This entire situation sounds like a petty kid who wants his candy back.

His red candy ...

 

[Flashbang]

For those of us wishing for a peaceful New Year, both sides of the Louboutin versus Yves Saint Laurent case of the red soles have other ideas.

YSL has hired 11 law professors who teach, research and write about trademark law to defend their side.

The professors filed a brief with the Federal Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on Tuesday saying Louboutin's arguments to protect his use of a single colour - red - in fashion "should be rejected in order to preserve freedom of innovation and competition."

According to WWD , the professors said Louboutin's side argued against the doctrine of "aesthetic functionality" which prevents companies from using "trademark as a kind of back door to perpetual patent-like protection for attractive but non-novel product features.…[If] the relevant consumers want a product feature because it is especially attractive, then that feature is not a proper subject of monopolisation by a single producer - unless it meets the demanding novelty requirement of design patent."

The legal experts went on: "A woman who buys red shoes is doing so for a reason - red shoes have a particular meaning to her, and to others, that cannot be supplied or even approximated by shoes of a different colour. Given the substantial creativity involved in both fashion design and fashion consumption, courts should not lightly allow one particular competitor to monopolise particular fashion submarket."

Louboutin and YSL have been embroiled in a legal battle over trademark infringement since last spring. Louboutin has made shoes with scarlet soles since 1992 when the designer saw an assistant painting her nails red.

On April 8th, Louboutin accused YSL of selling shoes with red soles, as part of their resort 2011 collection, that were "virtually identical" to his own, according to a suit filed in federal court in Manhattan. It sought a court injunction against the sale of the shoes and damages of at least $1 million.

Louboutin lost the first round in August when a judge ruled:

"Because in the fashion industry colour 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."

The case continues.

telegraph.co.uk

 

[Label Basher]

WTH sorry but I think YSL are going over the top now. At the end of the day when a women wears a red sole shoe 9 out 10 people will assume they are Louboutins.

The legal experts went on: "A woman who buys red shoes is doing so for a reason - red shoes have a particular meaning to her, and to others, that cannot be supplied or even approximated by shoes of a different colour.

Yeah they want people to think they are wearing Louboutins not YSL. This reminds me of something Rachel McAdams said in Glamour -

GLAMOUR: Do you get very involved in creating your characters' looks?
RACHEL MCADAMS: Yeah, I love those preliminary conversations about who a character is. You try on wigs, shoes and clothes. It's preferable when it's not about looking pretty. It can get a little dull to just be cute. We talk about things like, maybe my character can't afford these Christian Louboutins. [The stylist] will say, "No one will notice." And I'm like, "Everyone knows that red-bottom shoe!"​

 

[fashionista-ta]

But YSL didn't bring the suit ... they are simply defending their right to use red in whatever way they please. YSL has very well-known and recognizable looks of their own. Anyone who can afford YSL can also afford Louboutin.

 

[Zarina]

^I totally agree with you. The YSL shoes are very different from Louboutin, everyone who is into fashion could distinguish:

fyiitsagirlthing.wordpress.com

fashioncage.blogspot.com

These YSL palais pumps could never be Louboutin. Although he also makes peep toes, the platform and the heel is SO different and SO NOT Louboutin.

 

[KemAlnagdy]

That's stupid actually !! red soles aren't Louboutin's own !! and im sure YSL didnt copy it , it's just the idea that the sole's color matches the shoe color !

 

[Chanelcouture09]

You can distinguish between the shade of Red used on the YSL's from the Louboutin's, Louboutin's is more vivid and considerably brighter than the YSL's.

Of course we can tell, but not every man or woman could distinguish them like we can.

Also didn't Louboutin trademark the use of red soles as it is so iconic to his brand ? i don't know if i read it right or whether I'm imagining it...

 

[Melancholybaby]

Also didn't Louboutin trademark the use of red soles as it is so iconic to his brand ? i don't know if i read it right or whether I'm imagining it...

Yes, he did indeed trademark a particular shade of red for his soles .

 

[Chanelcouture09]

^Thought so, thanks for clarifying Melancholybaby! .

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ This thread is about the trademark having been thrown out (the court has ruled it isn't valid) as a result of Louboutin's sending out spies to other designers and threatening/bringing a series of lawsuits. Far from protecting the trademark, they appear to have overreached and imploded it. Now they are appealing ...

 

[kasper!]

Updated..

http://fashionista.com/2012/09/chri...rademark-battle-over-ysl-sort-of/#more-287067

SAD.

 

[GERGIN]

I'm very pleased YSL won that particular trial...I mean YSL speaks for itself...it doesn't need a red sole to be identified as a YSL shoe....Mr. Louboutin...grow up!