Fashion Law

Morning Docket: 04.20.12

* George Zimmerman will appear before Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. today to request bail. What kind of evidence will the prosecutor have to present for bond to be denied? [Miami Herald]

* Should prostitution be legalized? 70% of our readers think it should be (and not just because it’d mean they’d be employed nine months after graduation). But let’s get some more input from others on this topic. [Room for Debate / New York Times]

* “Bring me Solo and the Wookiee. They will all suffer for this outrage.” Rajabba the Hut seems to have had a second Goldman Sachs tipper. Say hello to Rajat Gupta, who has pleaded not guilty. [Bloomberg]

* Counsel in the Gucci v. Guess trademark case wrapped up their closing arguments in court yesterday. It’s generally not a good thing when the judge interrupts you to question your late filing. [Businessweek]

* Uh, apparently there’s a legal battle concerning intellectual property having to do with a Three Stooges porn parody. I personally shudder to think of how Curly is portrayed. [Hollywood, Esq. / Hollywood Reporter]

* After taking a blow from that fake beef lawsuit, Taco Bell’s sales are up thanks to its Doritos taco. Because getting your fingers covered in orange crap totally makes up for the “taco meat filling.” [Washington Post]

When Louis Vuitton’s legal team isn’t busy trying to peer pressure law school student groups into disposing of their fashion law event flyers, they’re off doing more important things — like winning landmark counterfeiting cases before the U.S. International Trade Commission.

This week, the ITC ruled in favor of Louis Vuitton Malletier in an effort to protect the luxury goods company from a “large-scale international counterfeiting and infringing enterprise” that was reportedly run by Jianyong Zheng and Alice Bei Wang. The pair had allegedly imported, sold, and profited from faux replicas of the fashion house’s iconic toile monogram.

What does this ruling mean for Louis Vuitton, and what kind of remedy will be issued?

Read more at Fashionista….

It’s been almost three years since Gucci first sued Guess for trademark infringement, but the drama keeps on coming. The case first became a tabloid darling when in 2010, Jonathan Moss, Gucci’s former in-house counsel, was turned out like last season’s shoes.

Apparently Moss had forgotten to renew his bar membership, and in the world of fashion law, one day you’re in, and the next day, you’re out (just like on Project Runway). Because there’s only one thing worse than faux leather, and that’s faux lawyering.

Armed with new lead counsel, Gucci faced off against Guess in federal court for the first time yesterday. While Gucci claimed that Guess had attempted to produce copycat designs, Guess countered that its products could never be confused with that of Gucci — after all, no one’s rapping about Guess.

Did anything else interesting happen in court?

Read more at Fashionista….

* If Obamacare gets struck down, do you think insurance companies will allow children to remain on their parents’ plans until age 26? My Magic 8-Ball says: “Outlook not so good.” [Wall Street Journal]

* There’s no crying in baseball bankruptcy sales! Which Biglaw firms hit a home run for playing a part in the sale of the LA Dodgers? Dewey & LeBoeuf, Foley & Lardner, and Sullivan & Cromwell. [Am Law Daily]

* “Just because you wear a hoodie does not make you a hoodlum.” But a hoodie will definitely prevent you from being recognized on the House floor. Just ask Congressman Bobby Rush. [New York Post]

* Things you can’t do on an airplane? Have a mid-flight nutty. Pilot Clayton Osbon has been criminally charged for his erratic form of in-flight entertainment, and he faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted. [Reuters]

* Guess who’s allegedly been infringing upon a high-end fashion house’s trademarks to the tune of $124M? Gucci was in court yesterday to accuse Guess of engaging in a massive “knock off” scheme. [Bloomberg]

If you enjoy fashion, check out our sister site, Fashionista.com.

Fashion law is a quickly-growing specialty practice area — a place where lawyers can aspire to dress stylishly while honing their legal skills in the glamorous world of haute couture law. You may never see all of the models and bottles a career in law once guaranteed, but you might get to work on their contracts.

A lawyer working in the business of beauty can expect to do a great deal of intellectual property work (after all, trademark law is sexier when you’re doing it in designer duds). An IP student group at a leading law school took that to heart, and decided to hold a symposium on the topic of fashion law.

The students pulled out all the stops for the event: they got Biglaw sponsorship, they created an eye-catching flyer, and they lined up some of the greats of the fashion law world to speak. Needless to say, they expected a great turnout.

What they didn’t expect was to be on the receiving end of a cease and desist letter from a high-end fashion house….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “A Top Law School Tells a High-End Fashion House Where to Stick Its Cease and Desist Letter”

Readers, we know what you must be asking yourselves: fashion law? Is that similar to unicorn law? No. Unlike unicorn law, and contrary to public opinion, fashion law actually exists.

In the past, we’ve written about lawyers and law students who have violated multiple fashion laws. We’ve even profiled a lawyer who specializes in fashion law. But we’ve never given you the scoop on what it’s like to be an insider in the business of beauty.

Earlier this week, the New York City Bar Association’s Committee on Fashion Law hosted an event that featured in-house attorneys from some of the country’s most prominent cosmetic brands — companies like Coty, Avon Products, Elizabeth Arden, and Revlon.

So, what’s it really like to be an in-house attorney working in the beauty and fashion industry? Will you get to flex your copyright and trademark muscles? Is it really as glamorous as it all seems?

Read more at Fashionista….

I consider myself to be pretty fashionable. Indeed, I (like so many others) pray to the patron saint of fashion, the Duchess of Cambridge. I am well versed in the laws of fashion. For example:

1. Thou shalt not wear a romper after age 22.
2. Thou shalt wear white any season.
3. Khakis are sad.

And I have learned the hard way about the fashion of law (i.e., what to wear at a law firm). It probably involves a khaki sack-turned-skirt but certainly does not involve hoop earrings. (Sorry Jay, but I think dress codes are still alive and well in small firms, at least if you are a woman.)

Yet I did not know what fashion law was. So I got a crash course from an expert, Charles “Chuck” Colman of Charles Colman Law PLLC.

What did I learn from Chuck?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Size Matters: No White After Labor Day Is Not Fashion Law”

Non-Sequiturs: 06.21.11

Mommy, have you seen my Hot Wheels car?

* Trademarks, and textiles, and taboos, oh my! Take a look into the fabulous world of fashion law with Charles Colman of Law of Fashion. [Professionelle]

* When you make stock market bets on SCOTUS outcomes, you better have a lot of money to throw around. Luckily, Ted Frank has plenty. [Point of Law]

* Jackass star Ryan Dunn passed away yesterday, which is sad. While normal people mourn the man who shoved a toy car up his butt, lawyers think up ways to assign liability. [Litigation & Trial]

* A J.D. is apparently still worth all of the debt associated with it because… why? Given that landing a job right now is about as easy as nailing jelly to a tree, how is this profession worth the debt? [Kiplinger]

* The blogs of the Am Law 100 have grown a lot this year, from 126 blogs to a whopping 269. Some firms are blogging duds, but I guess they’re busy making money. [Marketing Strategy and the Law]

* It may be better to be pissed off than pissed on, but getting peed on is apparently a natural step in professional development. [An Associate's Mind]

* Attorneys fall into one of three categories when it comes to the iPad: you got one; you want one; or your firm got one for you. Here are some lawyerly apps for you to play with. [Law Degree]

Page 2 of 212