Tag:fashion law

1
Running Marketing Campaigns in Australia Involving Prizes – What You Need to Know
2
Fashion Law Update – August 2022 Edition
3
PayPal Melbourne Fashion Festival: Fashion Law Seminar – Important Changes to the Designs Act
4
White House Provides Guidance on “Made in America” Executive Order
5
Fashion Law Update
6
“Lettuce Turnip the Beet” Pun on T-Shirts Not Trademark Use, Ninth Circuit Affirms
7
Not such a friendly decision for Hugz: A new development in passing off that could help combat fashion copy-cats

Running Marketing Campaigns in Australia Involving Prizes – What You Need to Know

Marketing and social media campaigns designed to promote a brand, product, service or business where consumers enter a competition to win a prize are known as “trade promotions” and typically fall within two categories – “games of skill” and “games of chance”.

Read More

Fashion Law Update – August 2022 Edition

“Fashion is not something that exists in dresses only. Fashion is in the sky, in the street, fashion has to do with ideas, the why we live, what is happening.”

Coco Chanel

In this edition of Fashion Law, we cover a range of topics which are having an impact on businesses and consumers in the fashion and luxury products sector worldwide.

Read More

PayPal Melbourne Fashion Festival: Fashion Law Seminar – Important Changes to the Designs Act

K&L Gates is proud to be hosting, as part of the PayPal Melbourne Fashion Festival, its annual fashion law seminar. As an Official Supporting Partner of the 2022 Festival, this year our session will cover recent changes to the Australian Designs Act and how these changes will assist fashion designers in protecting their valuable designs.

Read More

White House Provides Guidance on “Made in America” Executive Order

By Susan Kayser and Lauren Burke

On June 11, 2021, the White House issued initial guidance on how President Biden’s January 25, 2021 “Executive Order on Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers” (“Order”) will be implemented.  The Order aims to ensure that the federal government is spending taxpayer money on American-made goods, by American workers, and with American-made component parts.  This is significant considering the nearly $600 billion the federal government spends annually. 

The “Made in America Office” (MIAO) established by the Order is within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  The MIAO will review any exceptions from or waivers of Made in America Laws filed by government agencies.  The renewed focus on “Made in America” as implemented by the MIAO will likely influence enforcement of Made in America claims as well.

Read More

Fashion Law Update

“Style is the only thing you can’t buy. It’s not in a shopping bag, a label, or a price tag. It’s something reflected from our soul to the outside world—an emotion.”

Alber Elbaz

In this edition of Fashion Law, we have a huge selection of articles from around the world.

As many countries ease into a new way of living with/post COVID-19, the way we do business has changed. Some businesses managed to expand their offerings going online, while others needed to increase their brand protection to counteract copycats, trade mark and design infringements.

Read More

“Lettuce Turnip the Beet” Pun on T-Shirts Not Trademark Use, Ninth Circuit Affirms

The owner of the trademark “LETTUCE TURNIP THE BEET” cannot prevent third parties from printing the mere phrase on t-shirts, tote bags, or other products. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed on January 20, 2021 that consumers are likely to purchase such products because they find the phrase aesthetically pleasing and not because they associate the phrase with any particular source. LTTB LLC v. Redbubble, Inc., 19-16464 (9th Cir. 2021).

Read More

Not such a friendly decision for Hugz: A new development in passing off that could help combat fashion copy-cats

On 19 November 2020, the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) in the UK handed down its judgment in the case of Freddy SPA v Hugz Clothing Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 3032, which ran for an unusually long time for the IPEC (three days).

The decision was a rare occurrence of a passing off claim, together with other IP causes of action, succeeding in the get-up of a functional item, being “bum enhancing jeans”. Ordinarily, such cases, particularly with respect to fashion items, fail as the get-up is seen as merely design elements or ornamental, or the circumstances of the use lead to a conclusion that other trade marks (e.g. brand names and logos) dominate consumer perception.

This case could embolden brand owners in relation to enforcement of the look and feel of their clothing as it creates the possibility of confusion ‘post-sale’ in addition to the point of sale.

Read More

Copyright © 2024, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.