On August 10, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York denied Christian Louboutin's motion to stop Yves Saint
Laurent's ("YSL") use of red soles on their shoes, claiming infringement
of its trademark. However, the Court denied that preliminary
injunction motion and stated instead that Louboutin's red soles may not
be entitled to trademark protection at all.
Louboutin shoes are known for their red soles. On January 1, 2008,
the US Patent and Trademark Office granted Louboutin a corresponding
trademark (Registration No. 3,361,597) for the women's high fashion
designer footwear with lacquered red soles. In January 2011, Louboutin
claimed that YSL was using the same or confusingly similar shade of red
on the soles of its shoes in its Cruise 2011 collection. In fact, YSL's
shoes were either all red, including the soles, or blue, or yellow. An
all-red version had previously appeared in YSL's Cruise 2008
collection. Louboutin filed a lawsuit against YSL claiming trademark
infringement, among other claims. YSL counterclaimed seeking
cancellation of the Red Sole Mark because it is functional, ornamental,
not distinctive, and was secured by fraud on the USPTO.
To succeed in its claim of trademark infringement, Louboutin has to
show that its Red Sole Mark merits protection and YSL's use of the same
or similar mark is likely to confuse the consumers as to the origin of
the shoes. Typically, in the fashion industry, courts have upheld the
trademark registration for colors that appear in distinct patterns or
combinations of shades that "manifest a conscious effort to design a
uniquely identifiable mark embedded in the goods." See Opinion at p.
12. For example, Louis Vitton has trademarked an LV monogram combined
in a pattern of rows with 33 bright colors, and Burberry registered its
check pattern. On the other hand, use of a single color has been held
by the courts to be functional (functionality is defined by courts as a
feature that would put the competitor at a disadvantage because it is
"essential to the use or purpose of the article" or "affects its cost or
quality.") Looking at the use of red on Louboutin's shoe soles, the
Court noted Louboutin's own words that his shoe styles give "energy",
they are "engaging", red is "sexy" and it "attracts men to women who
wear my shoes." Also, red lacquered sole adds to the cost of the shoes.
Further, the Court noted that granting one designer monopoly on the
color red would hinder competition especially in the fashion industry
that is so dependent on colors.
The Court concluded that it has "serious doubts that Louboutin
possesses a protectable mark" and that it was unlikely to success in its
This is just the beginning of the battle, as the decision of the
Court can (and most likely will) be appealed to the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit. However, it seems that the battle
launched by Louboutin against YSL for trademark infringement is turning
into the battle for Louboutin to keep its red sole trademark.
Read more commentary from Arina Shulga on the
legal aspects of operating new and growing businesses at Business Law Post.
Lexis.com subscribers can explore/search Trademark Law resources on Lexis.com or access any of these
Mathew Bender Trademark Law publications:
Non-subscribers can purchase Trademark Law
treatises/resources and Mathew Bender publications from the LexisNexis Bookstore
For more information about LexisNexis products and
solutions connect with us through our corporate