Enterprise Digest

All of the important news and exclusive analysis you need, delivered to your inbox every Friday

Coming at you this week with one more reflection on the Chanel v. What Goes Around Comes Around case – which I have tried to keep pretty brief for now. As you likely already know, on Tuesday, a jury in the Southern District of New York sided with Chanel on all four of its causes of action: trademark infringement, false association, and unfair competition based on WGACA’s use of Chanel marks and other brand indicia, as well as hashtags; trademark infringement, false association, and unfair competition based on WGACA’s sale/offering for sale on non-genuine Chanel products; trademark infringement based on WGACA’s sale/offering for sale of counterfeit goods; and false advertising, and awarded Chanel $4 million in statutory damages “for its claim for trademark infringement based on WGACA’s sale or offering for sale of Chanel-branded handbags bearing counterfeit trademarks.”

As for next steps, the parties will present evidence related to “equitable remedies, such as disgorgement and injunctive relief” exclusively to the judge, with Chanel slated to file its brief on the matter within 30 days of the jury verdict.

The immediate aftermath of the trial has brought with it no shortage of commentary about how this will broadly impact the secondary market – with most of the chatter suggesting that the verdict will serve as a significant blow to resellers and their ability to offer up pre-owned goods. I am not sure I buy into the overly pessimistic view because to some extent, this case involved some arguably obvious no-no’s.

For instance, WGACA was found to be selling bags bearing counterfeit marks while also offering up hundreds of point-of-sale items (think: vanity trays, tissue boxes, etc.) that were meant exclusively for use in Chanel stores and were never authorized for sale (something that has been contested by WGACA).

Read More Here

Some Litigation Updates …

> Rolex v. Watchstyler: Rolex is waging a trademark infringement, counterfeiting, etc. case against the seller of fake watch faces. (You can find that complaint here.)


> Reebok v. Autry: Reebok submitted a memo in support of its motion to file a first amended complaint in their trademark-centric sneaker litigation this week. (More about that case here.)


> Amazon and BMW: Amazon and BMW Group win first civil lawsuit in Spain to shut down counterfeiters, the online retail titan revealed this

On the earnings front …

> LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton recorded revenue of €86.2B in 2023, equating to organic growth of 13% with respect to 2022.

> Kering reported revenue amounted of €19.6B in 2023, a decrease of 4% as reported.

> Hermès reported revenue of €13.43B in 2023, up 21% at constant exchange rates and 16% at current exchange rates compared to 2022.

In some deal-making news this week …

– Julie Zerbo
Founder & Editor-in-Chief

Here are TFL’s top articles of the week …

1. Dior Continues Clash With Adult Film Star as Brands Enforce Their Famed Marks. Dior is “likely to be damaged by the applicant’s registration and use of the GIGI DIOR mark,” both from an infringement and dilution perspective. 

2. Adidas Aims to Beat Securities Fraud Case Over Yeezy Deal. Adidas is looking to beat the “opportunistic” securities fraud lawsuit waged against it by a shareholder over its now-defunct Yeezy partnership.


3. Golden Goose Claims that New Balance Lacks TM Rights in 990 Design. Golden Goose is seeking a declaration from the court that New Balance maintains “no common law trade dress rights in the 990 shoe.” 

4. Chanel Prevails in Trademark Trial Against Reseller What Goes Around Comes Around.  This case is equally about how much leeway brands have to dictate how their TMs are used and the conditions in which goods bearing those marks are sold.

5. Hermès and Mason Rothschild Continue to Clash Over MetaBirkins Amid Appeal. Hermès and Mason Rothschild are clashing over the breadth of the injunction that blocks the MetaBirkins creator from further infringing Hermès’ Birkin-centric TM rights. (More coming on this shortly.)

6. Stanley Cup-Maker Named in False Advertising, Fraud Lawsuit Over Lead. PMI is allegedly on the hook for unfair business practices, fraud, false advertising & unjust enrichment for failing to disclose that its wildly-popular products contain lead.  

7. Court Refuses to Shield Identities of Suppliers in Temu, Shein Lawsuit. A federal court in DC recently refused Temu’s “unusual request” to shield the names of third-party fast fashion suppliers in a case that it is waging against Shein.

8. Artificial Fashion: AI Poses Risks, Rewards for Players in the Apparel Space. The evolving role of AI signifies not only a change of tool & technique but a reimagining of fashion at its core.