Nirvana Sues Marc Jacobs

Discussion in 'Designers and Collections' started by Benn98, Jan 3, 2019.

  1. Benn98

    Benn98 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    18,782
    Likes Received:
    2,694
    Marc Jacobs is Being Sued by Nirvana for Copying Logo in Recently Re-Released Grunge Collection

    December 29, 2018 TFL

    Nirvana has slapped Marc Jacobs International and a couple of big-name retailers with a strongly-worded lawsuit, claiming that the famed fashion brand “infringed Nirvana’s copyright, misleadingly used Nirvana’s trademarks, and utilized other elements with which Nirvana is widely associated to make it appear that Nirvana has endorsed or is otherwise associated with” Marc Jacobs’ “Bootleg Redux Grunge” collection.

    According to the complaint filed by Nirvana, LLC – the legal entity formed in September 1997 by Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic, and the Courtney Love-controlled Cobain Estate – in a California federal court on Friday, the late Kurt Cobain created Nirvana’s “Smiley Face” logo in 1991 and “Nirvana has used that copyright-protected design and logo continuously since [then] to identify its music.”

    Beyond music, Nirvana – which is “one of the most famous and influential rock bands in history” – has “licensed its copyrighted logo on literally dozens of different t-shirts, shirts, hats, hoodies, bags, backpacks, glasses, wallets, and other items of merchandise, many of which have sold extensively for decades.”

    Thanks to such extensive use, the “Smiley Face” design has “come to symbolize the goodwill associated with Nirvana,” thereby giving rise not just to copyright protection for the design but to trademark rights, as well, since “a significant portion of the consuming public assumes that all goods or services that bear the logo are endorsed by or associated with Nirvana.”

    Against this background, LVMH-owned Marc Jacobs recently re-released its controversial Grunge Collection, which designer Marc Jacobs originally showed for Perry Ellis back in 1993. In that collection are “items of clothing that utilize a design and logo virtually identical to Nirvana’s [Smiley Face] image,” the complaint asserts, including t-shirts, sweatshirts, and socks.

    However, unlike the Nirvana-logoed t-shirts being offered by Target or Urban Outfitters, for instance, Marc Jacobs allegedly did not receive authorization/pay a license fee to use Nirvana’s valuable intellectual property on its $115 t-shirts and nearly $200 crewneck sweatshirts.

    The Marc Jacobs wares are labeled the “Bootleg Grunge” t-shirt and sweatshirt, names that almost certainly won’t help the brand’s defense in this case, in which Nirvana LLC is asserting claims of copyright and trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false designation of origin.

    And speaking of defenses, there are, of course, potential fair use – namely, parody – defense arguments to be made here, centering on whether Marc Jacobs’ swapping in of the word “Heaven” for “Nirvana” is “transformative” enough to shield the brand from infringement liability.

    In addition to Marc Jacobs’ use of a virtually identical image, the brand is “using a virtually identical copy of Nirvana’s [legally-protected] image … as part of a wider campaign” that co-opts Nirvana’s intellectual property. According to Nirvana, this includes making the Nirvana image the signature image at ‘Bootleg Redux Grunge” collection promotional events, using lyrics from Nirvana songs, such as “Come as you are,” in ads for the collection, and displaying “memes,” such as one “from a video of Nirvana and its co-founder and singer Kurt Cobain performing ‘Smells Like Teen Spirit’” on the official Marc Jacobs Tumbler page.

    A Nirvana “Smiley Face” tee (left) & a tee from Marc Jacobs’ Grunge collection (right)

    [​IMG]
    A Nirvana “Smiley Face” tee (left) & a tee from Marc Jacobs’ Grunge collection (right)

    Such expansive usage of Nirvana’s Smiley Face logo and various other brand-identifying elements is an “intentional” effort by Marc Jacobs to “evoke Nirvana in the minds of [consumers],” per Nirvana and to “associate the entire ‘Bootleg Redux Grunge’ collection with Nirvana, one of the founders of the ‘Grunge’ musical genre, so as to make the ‘Grunge’ association with the collection more authentic.”

    While Nirvana LLC says its counsel has demanded that Marc Jacobs, as well as stockists Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue, immediately stop marketing and selling the allegedly infringing wares, the defendants “have ignored those demands, failed to stop any of the other wrongful activities” and instead, have increased their marketing of the collection.

    As of publication, Marc Jacobs’ e-commerce site, FarFetch, Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom, Bergdorf Goodman, and other retailers, were offering up the garments in question.

    Marc Jacobs’ “oppressive, fraudulent, and malicious conduct” has “caused Nirvana to suffer irreparable injuries, and threaten to dilute the value of Nirvana’s licenses with its licensees for clothing products,” and as a result, the group is seeking an array of monetary damages and injunctive relief, the latter of which would require the defendants to immediately and (potentially) permanently cease all use of Nirvana’s “Smiley Face” design and logo, and Nirvana’s name, song titles, any other indicia of Nirvana.

    The lawsuit comes 25 years after Jacobs showed his first Grunge collection, which was not well-received by Nirvana’s late front man. Shortly after his Perry Ellis runway show, Jacobs sent samples to Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love, the latter of whom declared years later in an interview with WWD, “We burned it. We were punkers – we didn’t like that kind of thing,” likely referring to the huge mark ups on otherwise down-market wares.

    More recently, on the heels of Hedi Slimane’s grunge-centric Saint Laurent debut, Love told TFL, “Hedi is a genius. No offense to Marc but he never got it right. This is what it really was. Hedi knows his ****. He got it accurate, and MJ and Anna [Sui] did not."

    Love and Jacobs seemed to have since put any ill-will between them to bed, particularly as Love appeared alongside Missy Elliott and Marilyn Manson in his very '90s-inspired Fall/Winter 2016 ad campaign, and her daughter Frances Bean Cobain followed a year later in Jacobs’ Spring/Summer 2017 ad, thereby, making the suit something of an interesting twist.

    While Marc Jacobs is currently embroiled in another copycat lawsuit, one filed in November 2017 by a handful of independent artists, who claim that the brand’s Resort 2017 collection was “unfortunately … not original” and “intentionally and knowingly” made use of their original pin and patch designs, Nirvana has had its fair share of intellectual property squabbles over the years, most centrally among Grohl, Novoselic, and Love, who were locked in several bitter lawsuits over rights dating back to 2001.

    A rep for Marc Jacobs was not immediately available for comment.


    *The case is Nirvana LLC v. Marc Jacobs International, LLC, et al., 2:18-cv-10743 (C.D.Cal).

    Thefashionlaw.com
     
    Les_Sucettes likes this.
  2. ghostwriter10549

    ghostwriter10549 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2017
    Messages:
    554
    Likes Received:
    296
    Well, what a plot twist, huh? I totally get it the copycat thing but what they saying about MJ is a little too much IMO.

    I dont see a point here. Marc have some big enemy that is trying to take his down or all this is just bad luck? MJ has no money now, coming for him now is just destroying more the business. LMVH needs to do something ASAP, because if they dont...
     
    YohjiAddict likes this.
  3. Les_Sucettes

    Les_Sucettes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,075
    Likes Received:
    140
    Good for them. The way grunge has been co-opted by "high" fashion is pretty disgusting. Marc is an early offender. Glad someone is going hard on this.

    I'm of the opinion that the only ones that can be money grabbing capitalists are the grungers themselves if they feel so inclined :mowhawk:. But I can't help but laugh at Love pretending that Hedi is some sort of genius that "gets it", and not that she's old fart with none of the druggy idealism of youth, that would sell her soul for money and attention.
     
  4. Perickles

    Perickles Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,929
    Likes Received:
    599
    my God what a rip off. They didn't even try. Good for Nirvana.
     
    dfl-001 likes this.
  5. dfl-001

    dfl-001 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,341
    Likes Received:
    148
    The whole industry is floundering. Everyone is so god damn lazy. Designers are lazy, models are lazy, editors are lazy, photographers are lazy, etc, etc, etc
     
  6. lewak

    lewak Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    47

    Marc's big enemy is New Ideas and Talent

    Glad he got called out here. MR LAZY
     
    RedSmokeRise, dfl-001 and jeanclaude like this.
  7. ghostwriter10549

    ghostwriter10549 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2017
    Messages:
    554
    Likes Received:
    296
    ^^

    Ok, Im not saying that what he did was right, but lets not forget that we are talking about MJ.

    If Marc wasn't close to someone like Frances Cobain (she even got a campaign) I would not say that this history is odd. There is something happening here and is more than the copycat. One thing is what Alessandro does at Gucci and another thing is what MJ did with the Nirvana logo, everybody knows that the smiley face belongs to Nirvana. Still not right, but its different.
     
    YohjiAddict likes this.
  8. Your Anchor

    Your Anchor Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2017
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    18
    "I'm not like them, but I can pretend...":innocent::magic:
     
  9. mepps

    mepps Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    171
    Good! I'm definitely on Team Nirvana.
    MJ doesn't even try anymore.
     
    dfl-001 likes this.
  10. Benn98

    Benn98 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    18,782
    Likes Received:
    2,694
    True and I agree. But I think Frances is for most part estranged from Courtney, and unfortunately Courtney is still the one holding the purse strings to Cobain's fund.

    The problem is that Marc, as extra as he is, does nothing in halves. He didn't just propose to his candlemaker toyboy, he had to do it at a Chipotle. With flash mob in tow! And here he didn't just rip off the smiley face, he really went in on the cult of the band and that t-shirt.....for his own profit. In which reality do you go through all that motions and never pause to think that Nirvana may be just a liiiiitle pis$ed off?

    Anyway, good luck suing a company who's in the red.
     
  11. SophiaVB

    SophiaVB Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    34
    Frances is most definitely not estranged from Courtney and receives a significant amount of money in trust from the Cobain fund. Courtney IS estranged from Grohl and Novoselic, who hate her.

    I would not be surprised if Courtney is in some part behind licensing the image to MJ as she has never been one to feel any sense of guilt at profiting from Kurt's image and legacy.
     
  12. MulletProof

    MulletProof Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    25,906
    Likes Received:
    218
    It's a lawsuit.. in California, gotta get dat money lol. I'm surprised they didn't add emotional distress.. I should sue them both for that :lol:, I see anything Nirvana-related and feel stressed out.
     
  13. Benn98

    Benn98 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    Messages:
    18,782
    Likes Received:
    2,694
    :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

    Like I told Ghostwriter, if they were so touched why not issue a cease and desist first? They watched this entire thing play out, the t-shirt, the collection, the lyrics, the Tumblr posts, and then decided to sue. Not excusing Marc at all, he definitely ripped them off and should get what comes to him, but the way Nirvana went about it is also shady.
     
    ghostwriter10549 likes this.
  14. YohjiAddict

    YohjiAddict Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    Messages:
    990
    Likes Received:
    202
    The irony of this money grabbing rehash becoming this brand's demiss.

    The irony of cool and anti-system Nirvana suing for use of that ugly logo.

    I just love it.
     
    ghostwriter10549 and Benn98 like this.
  15. EstefaniaAbaddon

    EstefaniaAbaddon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    2,113
    Likes Received:
    289
    I do hope that is the case and not Courtney being desperate for money after burning it all in her "white parties".

    I'm just curious about the outcome. There are a huge lot of fashion designers using (and abusing) of band logos nowadays. Marc Jacobs is far from being the worst offender.
     
    Benn98 likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"