Guess who copied Gucci! Yes, Guess!

Fashion law update on the case of Gucci v. Guess

The Guess sneaker above was found guilty of many counts of trademark dilution ;)

Super quick recap: Three years ago, Gucci filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Guess. For more info read my first post about this case (here).

Super quick update: Yesterday, Guess was ordered to pay Gucci $4.66 million (of the $221 million sought) for trademark infringement!


Judge Scheindlin (Judge Shira Scheindlin, not Judge Judy Sheindlin), found Guess guilty of four out of the five trademark fashion law crimes alleged by Gucci. Guess's use of script mark was the only thing that got away here because script fonts are extremely common in the fashion industry.

I previously discussed that Gucci might have some hurdles over the statue of limitations. Judge Scheindlin's opinion explained that 

"although the Lanham Act does not include a statue of limitations, the Second Circuit has held that the six-year limitations period from New York State fraud law applies." However, as trademark infringement is a 'continuing wrong.' the statute of limitations defense only applies to bar monetary recovery beyond the statutory period, and does not limit the availability of injunctive relief." 

As to dilution, since Gucci had no evidence of actual dilution, the Judge granted summary judgment on this point.


I will not regurgitate what you can read in the opinion (here). This opinion was a quick and fun read. If you enjoyed my previous posts discussing likelihood of confusion then you should take a look at how a Judge goes through the different factors.


...But what does it all mean?
Well, aside from the money Guess will have to shell out to Gucci, it will have to spend a lot more pesos to change up its trademark infringing designs and logos. The fashion world shall say goodbye to Guess's interlocking G logos. But do not fret! Guess will likely find new "inspiration" for us to discuss!

♥ Thanks for reading and supporting my blog! ♥

Gucci v. Guess fashion law fun

Another case of when imitation is not the sincerest form of flattery.

Three years ago, Gucci filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Guess. Unfortunately, Gucci's then in-house counsel was not up to date with his bar registration. I am not sure why it took three years later for this case to continue but at the end of March the case finally made its way into federal court in Manhattan before Judge Shira Scheindlin. If only they had waited 1/2 year longer and hired me, this could have been such an easy win for me. I love Gucci (the products, history, and salespeople alike--except for one nasty woman I encountered in Venice).

The issue in this case is Guess's blatant use of Gucci's products for imitation inspiration. Particularly, Guess's use of the square G and quattro G designs along with post-sale customer confusion. Guess's footwear licensing company, Marc Fisher Footwear, copied Gucci's trademarks and recognizable trade dress: the diamond-shaped pattern, green and red stripe design, and cursive font.

Guess's defense: It took inspiration from many designers. It does sound like something silly to use as a defense but with so much evidence, like e-mails from 1995 to 2008 saying that Marc Fisher Footwear mentioned sending Gucci fabric samples to Guess's fabric supplier to use for replication and an admission that $75,000 of Gucci products were purchased by Guess, the best Guess could hope for is to show that they took small ideas from many designers rather than too much from one.

 You be the judge: Was Guess inspired by Gucci or did Guess purposely copy Gucci? 

Gucci's only problem in my opinion may be that so much time has gone on with Guess infringing Gucci. As I mentioned previously, when a brand knows that its trademark is being misappropriated it needs to react in order to maintain the integrity of its mark.

♥ Thanks for reading and supporting my blog! ♥

Don't forget to enter my subscriber appreciation giveaway contest!