Battle of the Gs: Gucci Wins Trademark Suit Against Guess

The battle of the Gs is over. As noted in our previous post, Gucci went up against Guess over the following four designs:

• The green-red-green stripe
• A stylized "Square G"
• A group of four interlocking "G"s known as "Quattro G"
• A script logo

The U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin awarded Gucci $4.66 million dollars in damages and a permanent injunction against Guess' use of the first three of the four challenged designs. While the luxury brand was originally asking for $120 million in damages, Judge Scheindlin stated that Gucci was NOT entitled to damages reflecting lost sales or harm to its brand, but rather was entitled to damages that reflect the profits Guess made from the specific items where Gucci trademarks were infringed. Gucci may not have received the amount they were looking for, but this win sends a message to other retailers to be mindful of the designs and logos they want to incorporate into their designs.

Vogue's Pledge and The Model Alliance

This week, Vogue magazine's editors made a game-changing announcement, pledging to not hire under-age models or models who appear to have eating disorders. The oracle of fashion stated, "Vogue believes that good health is beautiful. Vogue Editors around the world want the magazines to reflect their commitment to the health of the models who appear on the pages and the well-being of their readers." Vogue's strategy includes mentoring programs for younger models, and better backstage conditions for runway models, specifically more healthy food options and a "respect for privacy." Vogue plans on checking IDs at the shoots and taking measures to assure models are not underweight. 

Vogue's Editors

In our previous post, TFG discussed the employment law issues facing the fashion industry, including the child labor law violations, health-care issues, and other illegal activities that models have had to endure in their workplace. It has always been an accepted part of the industry due to the lack of regulation. However, in recent months, there as been a general shift within the industry that can be attributed to a number of factors, particularly the recent deaths of models with eating disorders, the backlash Vogue faced regarding an editorial spread with a 10 year old model, and the launch of The Model Alliance by Sara Ziff.  The Model Alliance has brought light to many of the illegal employment activities that take place within the industry and has mobilized those within the industry to promote for more regulation. While Ziff was happy about Vogue's announcement, she and many others remain cautiously optimistic and hope that Vogue will carry through with its promise. 

Coco Rocha and Employment Law Issues in Fashion

The internet is buzzing with model Coco Rocha's stance against her cover for Elle Brazil after they decided to photoshop to make her appear slightly nude despite the no nudity clause in her contract.

She took to her blog and released the following statement:

"As a high fashion model I have long had a policy of no nudity or partial nudity in my photoshoots. For my recent Elle Brazil cover shoot I wore a body suit under a sheer dress, but recently discovered that the body suit was Photoshopped out to give the impression that I am showing much more skin than I actually was or am comfortable with. This was specifically against my expressed verbal and written direction. I’m extremely disappointed that my wishes and contract were ignored. I strongly believe every model has a right to set rules for how she is portrayed and for me these rules were clearly circumvented."

While photoshop may be commonplace in the editorial covers and spreads of fashion magazines, the significance of Coco's stance is that it touches upon the violation of her contractual rights. While a lot of fashion law is consumed with intellectual property issues, the employment law issues pertaining to models have also become a hot topic.

As glamorous as models' lives may appear, they often find themselves in compromising situations that have long been accepted by the industry as the "dark" side of fashion with no legal remedy. These issues range from child labor law violations for underage models, to models' images being exploited by advertisers without permission or compensation, to modeling agencies requiring their models to pay for their own travels and not providing them with proper healthcare when needed, to sexual harassment on the set of photoshoots. But it is the lack of regulation that has created this dark side of fashion.

For example, when models join an agency, they are signed on as independent contractors. As a result, many of the employment laws that protect employees and leave the employer assuming liabilities are rarely applicable to models. Clever legal loophole that has allowed many agencies to get away with illegal conduct, such as lack of financial transparency in models' contracts that leave many of them in debt.

The other reason is perhaps more a societal issue than legal. Why should we feel bad for a model if their picture is used in an advertising campaign that they never agreed to or received compensation for? They're beautiful and don't have real problems, right?

While models may provoke a range of reactions and issues, the law is the law and should protect everyone. If a contract has an express no nudity provision and has been accepted by both parties, violation of their terms is a breach of contract that can result in a lawsuit and monetary damages. 

It's no coincidence that Coco Rocha has taken this stance given her position on the Advisory Board of the Model Alliance. The non-profit organization was founded by model Sara Ziff with the support of fellow models and the Fashion Law Institute. The Model Alliance provides a platform for models and leaders in the fashion industry to organize to radically improve the conditions under which models work. 

Coco Rocha and Sara Ziff

With the launch of the Model Alliance in February 2012, TFG has no doubt that these employment law issues will be properly underscored and over time will pave the way for necessary regulation. To learn more, check out this fascinating CBS interview with Sara Ziff and Susan Scafidi on the Model Alliance.

Louis Vuitton's Victory Against Counterfeiters

Louis Vuitton's long-standing battle against counterfeits finally led to a victory on Tuesday.  After filing a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission in 2010, the ITC ruled in favor of Louis Vuitton in an unfair trade case alleging widespread counterfeiting and knockoffs.  

The counterfeiters operate as a large-scale international enterprise that run several shell companies, including T&T Handbag Industrial Co. Ltd. in Guangzhou, China; Sanjiu Leather Co. Ltd. in Guangzhou; Meada Corp. and Pacpro Inc., both in El Monte, Calif., and Trendy Creations in Chatsworth, Calif.  The companies manufacture the products abroad and then import and sell thousands of counterfeit and knockoff handbags, luggage, accessories and packaging and illegally profit off the luxury brand’s trademarks.  

It is generally not common to file a lawsuit with the ITC. Louis Vuitton was the first luxury goods company to seek redress with the agency. While the ITC must still determine what type of remedy to impose, the ruling is significant because along with the recent True Religion victory against counterfeiting cybersquatters, it sends a message to those running these counterfeit networks that such illegal activity will not go unpunished. 

Kitson Faced with Faux Fur Mislabeling Controversy

This week, the well-known Los Angeles based boutique Kitson found itself the target of the found itself to be the target of investigations by the Humane Society of the U.S. after it discovered that the boutique was selling real fur products that were mislabeled as faux fur. According to WWD, the animal-protection organization "identified three items sold online by the Los Angeles-based retailer described as 'faux fur' that laboratory analyses found contained fur from various animals, including possibly a coyote, gray wolf and raccoon dog." Two of the items sold are shown below.

Image provided by Human Society

Kitson has denied any willful attempt to deceive its customers. While the mislabeling of real fur as "faux fur" may pose many animal rights issues, it is also a serious federal offense. The Fur Products Labeling Act requires all manufacturers of fur garments to include the following information in their labeling:

• The animal name
• The Registered Information Number of the manufacturer 
• The country of origin 

Furthermore, it prohibits the sale and advertising of fur products that have been falsely or deceptively advertised. For a copy of the full act and all the labeling requirements, click here. In addition to the federal standards, manufacturers of fur products must also comply with state business practices. In New York, faux fur is defined as "artificially manufactured fur which is made to resemble real fur but which is not derived from animals." Any violation of this requirement shall be punishable by fines.  

Whatever stance our readers may take on the fur debate, the important legal issue here is labeling. While we here at TFG aren't fans of wearing real fur, consumers should always know what they are purchasing. The underlying policy of the law is to protect the trust of the consumer and ensure the validity of labels. According to the fashion laws, the only thing that should be faux on the faux fur garment is the fur itself. Not the label.