Vuitton Sues Dooney

[maarit]

By SUZANNE KAPNER

from nypost.com

June 3, 2004 -- Upscale handbag maker Dooney & Bourke would normally find itself on the same side of the courtroom as Louis Vuitton when it comes to policing knockoffs.
Now, in a twist that shows how aggressive luxury goods makers are becoming when protecting their trademarks, Louis Vuitton has accused the rival in a lawsuit of ripping off one of its best-selling designs.

The suit, filed in United States District Court, also shines the spotlight on a tricky fashion question: When does a trend cross the line into trademark infringement?

The bag in question is the colorful Murakami, a collaboration with Japanese artist Takashi Murakami, which features the brightly colored Louis Vuitton logo splashed against white or black leather.

Dubbed the "It Bag" by fashion editors, the design was an instant hit when it was introduced last spring and quickly sold out of stores.

The bags also spawned a sea of copycats, according to Louis Vuitton parent LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton, which has filed no less than four lawsuits in the past year to protect the design.

Lawyers said the case against Dooney & Bourke is particularly striking, because LVMH has historically focused on counterfeiters — typically small, sometimes shady, operations that try to pass off designer fakes as the real thing.

By contrast, the bags sold by Dooney & Bourke in its own fancy boutiques and upscale department stores feature the company's monogram logo, which itself is protected by trademarks, said Thomas McAndrew, Dooney & Bourke's counsel.

When it comes to protecting against knockoffs, "we are normally on the same side of the ledger as Louis Vuitton," McAndrew said.

LVMH doesn't accuse Dooney & Bourke of counterfeiting, a federal crime that can mean jail time, but rather of trademark infringement, which carries civil penalties.

LVMH declined to comment on pending litigation.

While not a complete novelty, trademark cases still tend to be somewhat of a rarity in fashion and can be harder to prove than cases against counterfeiters, lawyers said.

"Most lawsuits in the fashion industry focus on counterfeiters, who are typically not established retailers or manufacturers," said Joseph Gioconda, a partner with Kirkland & Ellis LLP, who represents Hermes and other luxury companies.

To win its case, lawyers said, LVMH must prove that consumers are likely to confuse the Dooney & Bourke bag, developed in conjunction with Teen Vogue and sold for about $200, with Louis Vuitton's version, which costs $360 to $3,950.

At issue is whether Dooney & Bourke, a Norwalk, Conn.-based company founded in 1975 by designer Peter Dooney and partner Frederick Bourke with a reputation for courting the country club set, put enough of its own creative spin on the design.

"Trademark law doesn't give you a monopoly on a trend," said Edward Di Lello, a lawyer with Darby & Darby, which is defending Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse against separate knock-off claims by Louis Vuitton.

Both Di Lello and McAndrew said the suits against their clients represent a more aggressive strategy than Louis Vuitton has adopted in the past.

"In some instances, Louis Vuitton is mistaking this notion of trademark protection for competition," McAndrew said. "They are a major player in the luxury business, and they've been able to intimidate other entities, sometimes by using the courts."

 

[leyla m.]

they must have read all the comments on our board and decided then to sue

i would be interested to see how the lawsuit goes!

im not sure what i would have done if i were the head of LV luggage

thanks for posting maarit

 

[nycgirl84]

They should sue D & B- they totally ripped off their idea!

 

[banana]

Well it depends on what they consider to be the unique factor of their design. Is it the fact that their logo is splashed all over thei bag or is it the rainbow of colours? Either way, I think they will have a hard time proving that they are the original creators of a unique design.

 

[brian]

Originally posted by leyla m.@Jun 4th, 2004 - 2:31 pm
they must have read all the comments on our board and decided then to sue

I'd have to agree

 

[MJCouture]

wait, I forgot, refresh my memory. Did LV invent the use of initials? and wait when God created the universe they helped make the rainbow and the absence of color that is white, correct?



I don't like the db bags, but LV doesnt have any real right to sue them, other companies ARE aloud to be inspired by a trend, which is what multicolor bags have become, its in the same league as the Jelly Kelly in my opinion.

 

[Toxxxic]

The case would probably be dismissed so I won't get too work up or hyped up over it but I despise DB bags anyways. Ugh they're ssoo ugly and they're not creative or eye-popping yet my dad's girlfriend seems to has every one of their bag

 

[maarit]

Originally posted by leyla m.@Jun 4th, 2004 - 3:31 pm
thanks for posting maarit

You're welcome!

 

[Plumour]

 

[LadyIllusion]

A lawsuit is so ridiculous, i think they should be happy that people are inspired by their creativity. If the bag was copy of LV, with the logos etc i could understand, cuz when i look at a D&B bag, in my mind there is no similarity apart from the multi colours that is used.

 

[wyatt.]

they should also sue xoxo liz c. uhh...and all the rest...

but this is a gooooodddd start.

bravo.


those companies should try and give it's clientel something that's innovative and good quality for the money not something that's trying to be something it's not.

 

[wyatt.]

Originally posted by OriginalGucciGirl@Jun 5th, 2004 - 4:23 pm
A lawsuit is so ridiculous, i think they should be happy that people are inspired by their creativity. If the bag was copy of LV, with the logos etc i could understand, cuz when i look at a D&B bag, in my mind there is no similarity apart from the multi colours that is used.

this is like saying copying the highest form of flattery.


it just irritates everyone is what it does.

 

[TheSoCalledPrep]

They had to start somewhere, I suppose.

 

[tott]

The fact is that the multi-colour logo design was original. It's not like every brand already was doing it before Vuitton did it.

It'll be interesting to see where this lawsuit ends up; thrown out of court or actually taken seriously...

 

[Meg]

Isn't it a bit late for this lawsuit though? I mean the bags came out awhile ago. I'm just confused by the time factor

 

[Purr]

Originally posted by MJCouture@Jun 4th, 2004 - 9:22 pm
wait, I forgot, refresh my memory. Did LV invent the use of initials? and wait when God created the universe they helped make the rainbow and the absence of color that is white, correct?



I don't like the db bags, but LV doesnt have any real right to sue them, other companies ARE aloud to be inspired by a trend, which is what multicolor bags have become, its in the same league as the Jelly Kelly in my opinion.

actually, lv DID invent the use of logos they started with the damier, but people were copying so they moved onto initials.


hpowever, i agree with you... D&B aren't the only ones copying... don't XOXo and Guess have "multicolore" bags as well?

 

[Choisir]

Originally posted by Purr@Jun 6th, 2004 - 4:46 am
hpowever, i agree with you... D&B aren't the only ones copying... don't XOXo and Guess have "multicolore" bags as well?

I guess the difference that LV is trying to make is that dooney is also a high end brand. Not as exclusive as LV but much more than guess or xoxo so its the same target market. Women who perhaps could afford an LV multicolore but were unable to find one might settle with a Db.

That's probably why they're not persuing the counterfeiters as heavily. There's very little overlap between the markets of people who buy fakes and who would buy real ones. because chances are if you can afford a real one you won't settle for a fake.

Even if they lose the lawsuit, it will probably scare any other high end dealers into trying the same thing.

 

[MJCouture]

Originally posted by Purr+Jun 6th, 2004 - 4:46 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Purr @ Jun 6th, 2004 - 4:46 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-MJCouture@Jun 4th, 2004 - 9:22 pm
wait, I forgot, refresh my memory. Did LV invent the use of initials? and wait when God created the universe they helped make the rainbow and the absence of color that is white, correct?



I don't like the db bags, but LV doesnt have any real right to sue them, other companies ARE aloud to be inspired by a trend, which is what multicolor bags have become, its in the same league as the Jelly Kelly in my opinion.

actually, lv DID invent the use of logos they started with the damier, but people were copying so they moved onto initials.


hpowever, i agree with you... D&B aren't the only ones copying... don't XOXo and Guess have "multicolore" bags as well? [/b][/quote]
I know that is what they always say, but I find it hard to believe that NO ONE monogramed their luggage before Mr. Vuitton came around. If that was the case, why not sue Gucci, Fendi, and any other high-end luxury company that also uses logos, as it is apparent that they "coppied" LV. Although I completely believe DB coppied LV, I don't see any damages that LV has suffered. If someone wants a Vuitton bag they arent going to settle for something that you can get in almost every mall in the country, so I doubt LV has lost very many sales to Dooney.. The people they should be going after more fiersly is the actual counterfit producers.

 

[Plumour]

Originally posted by MJCouture@Jun 6th, 2004 - 4:27 pm
I know that is what they always say, but I find it hard to believe that NO ONE monogramed their luggage before Mr. Vuitton came around. If that was the case, why not sue Gucci, Fendi, and any other high-end luxury company that also uses logos, as it is apparent that they "coppied" LV.

it's about the multicolor logos...

 

[Vuittonista]

IN RESPONSE TO PURR LV DID NOT START THE USE OF LOGO, GOYARD DID IN 1892. LV DIDN'T START THEIR LOGO UNTIL 1896. SO IF ANYBODY SHOULD BE SUING ANYBODY OVER LOGOS THAT ARE COMPLETLY DIFFERENT IT SHOULD BE GOYARD SUING VUITTON.fURTHERMORE, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT TRUE LV CLIENTS GO TO LV FOR HIGH QUALITY LUXURY GOODS AND ALTHOUGH D&B PRODUCTS ARE NOT BAD THEY MOST CERTAINLY DONT FIT IN THE SAME CATEGORY AS LV PRODUCTS. IF PEOPLE WANT THE LV MULTICOLR BAG THEY GET THE LV MULTICOLOR BAG NOT A FAKE CANAL STREET RIP OFF OR A SIMILAR BAG. I MEAN I PERSONALLY WOULDNT BE COUGHT DEAD WEARING A FAKE I WOULD RATHER NOT OWN A HANDBAG THEN TO HAVE TO HIDE MY POOR QUALITY FAKE AROUND B/C LETS FACE IT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GOOD FAKE, US EXPERTS KNOW WHATS REAL AND WHATS FAKE. D&B DID MAKE A BAG THAT HAS ITS LOGO IN MULI COLORS BUT I WOULD NEVER IN A BILLION YEARS "THINK OH WOW I WOULD PERFER TO GET THE D&B MULIT COLORED LOGO BAG OVER THE LV MULTI COLORED LOGO BAG", LET ALONE CONFUSE THE TWO BAGS, AND TRUE LV DEVOTEES WOULDNT EITHER, SO MY OPINION IS THAT LV DIDNT LOSS ANY PROFITS. ALSO I MUST ADD THAT LV MULTICOLORED BAGS HAD A WAITING LIST SO LONG THAT THE LV STORE SALES PEOPLE WOULD TELL PEOPLE THAT BEING ON THE WAITING LIST DIDNT RESERVE YOU A BAG SO PUTTING YOUR NAME ON THE WAITING LIST WAS ALMOST POINTLESS, THEREFORE LV WAS EXTREMELY BACK ORDERED IN THESE LV MULTI BAGS SO HOW IS THAT LOSING ANY PROFIT?