Mark Jacobs Company, Nirvana Corporation, Marc Jacobs discussed on Pop Fashion
Has accused Marceca of copyright infringement for using Nevada trademarks in the collection filed in California federal court last week, the lawsuit states that nirvana smiley face logo was created by the band's original frontman and founder Kurt Cobain in nineteen Ninety-one. And that quote, nirvana has used that copyright protected design and logo continuously sense to identify its music, unquote, never mind, the fact that you know, the band has not exactly produced music in a recent period of time, but this particular design of smiley face, it has this instant recognisability of oh that went with that. From that time apparel, featuring the nervous Miley face logo has been sold through retailers like target and urban outfitters. However, Marc Jacobs did not pay a license feature in our Rana to use its intellectual property big mistake. So the fact that the nirvana corporation licenses out that logo for small that's something. I learned today. Second of all I don't know why I was surprised that nirvana still has like a business because there are several living members of the band, and their oil teas and all sorts of stuff. It was like I didn't even consider this that it could be an issue with this collection. But surprised demons Domeisen Kirk obain, just don't get your business. Right. Don't massacre cobaine all there is to it. I side with nirvana on this one. I do a thousand percent. I I feel like. This is kind of an open and shut case. I have not heard a comment from the Mark Jacobs company. But I mean, I mean, it's kind of obvious you guys. Yeah. When I saw the shirt, I assumed they were cool at the band, Bhagat a mind your Ps and qs come on. Right. You gotta say, thank you. Thank you. Do it's their logo. It just is. So to all of you aspiring designers out there. This is just a little warning that like when you take inspiration from pop culture, and then you re release your line twenty some odd years later, just make sure you have the copyright stuff figured out. And you'll be fine. You'll be fine. Everything's fine to say, thanks. Let's talk about more lawsuits. Because apparently that's what we're doing today. Look we are starting twenty nineteen with rage and revenge and what says raging eventually lawsuits like money Honey vans filed a lawsuit against target for copyright and free. Moment. So they are suing target for trademark infringement and unfair competition. Target is selling the Camilla lays up sneaker for fifteen dollars fans old school sneaker is price at sixty dollars. That's Nico was originally launched in nineteen seventy seven and currently accounts for twenty five percent of vans. Business the shoes. Look, a lot alike, both are black and white side stripes, the company states that the side stripe is instantly recognizable, and it's a design element that is necessary in order to be eligible for trademark protection. So the sang like this is part of what's protected within our brand what I thought about was Lou batons and the red souls. That's how they've gotten its core a lot where people have like L. Let's put red paint on the bottom of our shoes. No, no. You can't because it's instantly recognizable as baton brand fans are saying something very similar like this is a very recognizable. Mark for our company. With footwear. If I if I'm remembering correctly, a lot of the court stuff comes down to function or fashion. Yes. If the part, they're arguing about is a functioning part of the shoe like necessary, like a soul or a lace, your you have less of a chance in court of winning than if you say that the thing that ran has copied as purely fashionable. Yeah. Van say that that products are confusing to customers because they look so much alike and some shoppers or even referring to the target version as fake vans vans as a brand doing really well right now they are on track to do five billion in revenue by twenty twenty three..