Gucci

Blech.

* A manager at a Long Island-based national women’s organization has been sued by her female coworkers for allegedly being too grabby and being “obsessed with butts.” Not sure what to think about the lawsuit, but you can’t really complain about the photo of the manager motorboating her (also female) friend included with the story. [New York Post]

* The organizers of the London Olympics are concerned about getting hacked. So like any smart business, they employed a legion of hackers (pardon me, “ethical hackers”) to protect their systems. [IT-Lex]

* In other Olympic news, Congress is PO’d that the American Olympic team uniforms were made in China. As Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit points out, though, the real problem is that they are ugly as hell. [Christian Science Monitor via Instapundit]

* George Zimmerman wants another new judge because he claims this one is “prejudiced against him.” Sorry, but judges aren’t like Magic cards, you can’t continue to trade up. [Big Story / Associated Press]

* You gotta fight / for your right / to flip the bird at the 5-0. (That said, assuming you have said right, it doesn’t make it a good idea.) [New York Magazine]

* Are lawyers also doctors? In the words of Dr. Evil, “How ’bout no, Scott.” [Adjunct Law Prof Blog]

* Handbags at dawn: can’t get enough of the Gucci v. Guess case? Take a look at some comprehensive analysis on this fashion law showdown. [Law of Fashion]

* A state judge in Pennsylvania ruled that discovery of private content on Facebook is only “minimally intrusive.” In other words, if you still hadn’t heard, the “private” stuff you put on Facebook is really anything but. [CPR Law Blog]

It’s Friday, and I’m going camping for the weekend. After the jump, check out a video of where I’m going….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Non-Sequiturs: 07.13.12″

When we last wrote about the epic trademark war that Gucci launched against Guess in 2009, we noted that the case made headlines soon after the first filing. Apparently Gucci’s former in-house counsel, Jonathan Moss, had been engaging in faux lawyering, and he paid for it dearly — with his job.

Gucci v. Guess has been a dramatic roller coaster ride ever since, complete with men crying on the witness stand, and hours upon hours of in-court questioning for one company’s chief executive officer.

But as we noted in Morning Docket, a verdict has finally been reached in the case, and it looks like Guess will have to own up to its fashion faux pas with a payout of more than $4 million dollars in damages. But how will this ruling affect the fashion world at large? Let’s take a look….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Fashion Law & Order: The Latest in the Gucci v. Guess Debacle”

* Yesterday marked day two of jury deliberations without a verdict in the John Edwards campaign-finance violations trial. The former presidential candidate says he’s “doing OK,” but you know he’s secretly pissing his pants over going to prison. [ABC News]

* Martin Weisberg, a former Baker & McKenzie partner, pleaded guilty to money laundering and conspiracy to commit securities fraud. He faces up to 15 years for both crimes. Like he wasn’t earning enough as a Biglaw partner. [New York Law Journal]

* A judge told two fashion houses to leave it on the runway, and not in the courtroom, but that’s not going to stop Gucci from collecting its due. Guess owes the company $4.66M for trademark infringement. [Bloomberg]

* If you’re wondering what you’re going to have to do to get your student loans discharged in bankruptcy, it’s really quite simple. Get diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder, and you’ll be set. [National Law Journal]

* What’s the difference between looted art and art looted by the Nazis? The Hitler part. Proposed art legislation will ban all museum recovery claims, except those of families affected by the Holocaust. [New York Times]

* “”I can’t believe f**king Allred called you!” In a total attention whore battle royale, Okorie Okorocha has sued Gloria Allred for allegedly stealing both of his clients in the John Travolta gay sex scandal. [CNN]

* 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]

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]

Back in April 2010, we bestowed Lawyer of the Day honors upon Jonathan Moss, former in-house counsel to Gucci. There was a question, however, as to how much of a “lawyer” Moss was.

During his seven years working at the luxury fashion house, Moss did not have an active law license: he was a graduate of Fordham Law and a member of the California bar, but with “inactive” status. As a result, during the discovery process in some trademark litigation, opposing counsel from Guess? challenged Gucci’s assertion of attorney-client privilege over communications to and from Moss. The reasoning: because Moss wasn’t entitled to practice law in any jurisdiction, due to his inactive status with the California bar, the attorney-client privilege did not extend to communications with him.

A federal magistrate judge sided with Guess, concluding that Gucci’s communications with Moss weren’t privileged — and subject to disclosure. Yikes. After conducting an investigation that confirmed Moss’s inactive bar status, Gucci fired him in March 2010.

But now a federal district judge — Judge Shira Scheindlin, that delicious judicial diva of Zubulake fame — has set aside the magistrate’s order, and granted Gucci’s motion for a protective order….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Good News for In-House Counsel: Privilege Prevails in Showdown at Gucci Gulch”