Louis Vuitton’s Opposition To Trademark For Gardening Tools Fails Spectacularly
from the fail-fail-fail dept
Every once in a while you get a trademark bullying story that meets a just and proper end. Almost a year ago, we discussed how Louis Vuitton, famous maker of luxury fashion products and infamous trademark bully, did its bullying thing when it opposed the trademark application for a company in the UK called L V Bespoke. Louis Vuitton asserted that only it could use the letters “L” and “V” in its branding and further alleged that, because it uses those letters on metal affixed to its luxury items, it was further problematic in this case because L V Bespoke also makes things with metal. Lost in all of that was the simple fact that L V Bespoke makes gardening products and that the metal it works with are gardening support stakes. If you don’t believe this whole thing was really that stupid, go read the post. It was.
But Louis Vuitton is big and L V Bespoke is a tiny company without the legal warchest to match its interlocutor. The founders of the company, from which it derives its “L V” name, are Lawrence and Victoria Osborne and it would have been extremely easy for the two to cave to the fashion giant’s demands and either rebrand the company or close up shop. Fortunately, that didn’t happen and the UKIPO has sided with L V Bespoke and has granted it the mark.
“It’s a great way to start the new year and we can finally wholeheartedly embrace the branding of our business. To not have the worry of having to rebrand or rescope our business is a huge relief. We’ve had the handbrake on our business for the last six months awaiting this decision, so it’s been a long time coming,” said Victoria.
This is obviously the right decision, but we also shouldn’t allow the fact that this went on for months and months to go without more than a mere shrug of our shoulders. Louis Vuitton absolutely knew, or should have known, that this opposition was made without even a hint of merit. It bullied this small company because it could. I can’t think of another explanation for the opposition. And that opposition took a very real toll on Lawrence, Victoria, and their business.
“It’s been challenging both mentally and financially. Mentally it’s been hugely challenging for us as a family not knowing whether or not we can continue to grow our business with the presence and identity that we already have,” she said.
“Everything has come as a huge relief and I hope the next six months aren’t as challenging as what the last have been awaiting this decision so we can finally move forward,” she continued.
And to be clear, it wasn’t just emotionally taxing, having to fight this nonsense. The business had to spend the dollar-equivalent of nearly $20,000 to combat the opposition, while the final decision in the outcome only requires Louis Vuitton to reimburse L V Bespoke a quarter of that in costs. In other words, a small business had to spend the equivalent of nearly $15,000 out of pocket merely because one of the largest and wealthiest luxury designer brands on the planet decided to make nonsensical trouble.
That’s pretty shitty and draws the obvious point: there needs to be more punishment for filing absolutely senseless trademark oppositions such as this.
Filed Under: gardening tools, likelihood of confusion, trademark
Companies: l v bespoke, louis vuitton
Comments on “Louis Vuitton’s Opposition To Trademark For Gardening Tools Fails Spectacularly”
Too bad they only ship in the UK.
This kind of trademark activity will never cease to be that stupid. It doesn’t even make sense for the bullies, except in that it is bullying, so if that’s what floats your boat…
Sometimes I read stories like this and remember why the french revolution happened.
Re:
What? Some rulers losing their heads over some revolting commoners?
Re: Re:
When big companies can fuck over smaller ones and only pay a fraction of the damages as a cost of doing business, it sends a message that the rich are actively shielded from consequence. And when the common man realizes this, well – I’ll let someone more eloquent than me explain to you why this is an issue.
— Nick Hanauer
Re: Re:
If that’s the lesson you learned, it’s a rather narrow one.
Re: Re: Re:
i think you mistake the joke which is written there.
Re: Re: Re:2
Probably. I might have heared a whooshing noise as I hit post……
Re: Re: Re:3
It took me a while to get the joke too. Imma have to have a whoosh noise with you, mate…
UK purchaser here
I’ve been needing some nice gardening stuff so my order’s just gone in.
Wrong kind of hoes, Louie.
Louis Vuitton: Next lawsuit, “Ludwig van Beethoven” aka “L V Beethoven”, let’s ask 1€ per CD ever sold.
My recent vacation inquiries regarding a stay in Los Vegas resulted in targeted advertising for gardening equipment.
Maybe they should allow this one. After all, Louis Vuitton’s legal department sure seem to be a bunch of tools.
Nor can I. Louis Vuitton wouldn’t have had a case even if L V Bespoke products were in the same class as theirs, since their trademark is on the letters ‘LV’ alone and there’s zero likelihood of confusion because of the extra word ‘Bespoke’ being in the UK company’s name and the fact that everyone says “Louis Vuitton” (with variable pronunciation) rather than “LV” when talking about the fashion brand.
Reminds me of this from 12 years ago–
https://abovethelaw.com/2012/03/a-top-law-school-tells-a-high-end-fashion-house-where-to-stick-its-cease-and-desist-letter/
(Unfortunately, the Penn response letter seems to have vanished form Penn’s web site.)
Re:
The letter is at a scribd link in the article.
i did not remember this at all, thanks for the link, it’s a good one.
“Louis Vuitton absolutely knew, or should have known, that this opposition was made without even a hint of merit.”
Bullies don’t needs reasons to bully.
A bitter victory showing yet again two tiers of justice in the world. If ruled against them you can guarantee they would’ve looked for hundreds of thousands if not millions for violating their trademark.
It’s absurd they are only required to reimburse them a quarter of their legal cost to just defend themselves.
Disgusting.
Another explanation
I can – they have a law firm on retainer or in-house, and periodically ask “what have you done lately to earn your pay?” So they do things like this to justify their paychecks.
Fuck off, LLM troll.
But they want to be bullies too
“Fortunately, that didn’t happen and the UKIPO has sided with L V Bespoke and has granted it the mark.”
The main purpose of getting a trademark is to have an IP right to use to bully other people though, to restrict their right to use a certain mark or name. So… this is not as heroic as you make it out to be. The little wanna-be bully defeated a bigger bully. Yay?
ALL IP law is evil and should be abolished: yes, patents are worst, followed by copyright, second worst, but trademark law is evil too. The problem here is not that LV did anything wrong, they were not “abusing” the law; the law, the law, the law itself is the problem, to paraphrase Burke.