• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Karl-Hermann Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Dr. Christoph Hölscher
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Tiffany & Co victorious in trademark litigation case versus Costco

15. September 2017

US discount warehouse chain Costco has been ruled by a US district judge for trademark infringement of Tiffany & Co. by selling “Tiffany” engagement rings. Costco Wholesale Corp. must pay approximately US $19.4 million in damages to the luxury juweler. Moreover the discount warehouse chain is forbidden to use “Tiffany” as a standalone term for selling engagement rings that were marketed using Tiffany’s name.

DiamantringThe case Costco Wholesale Corp. versus Tiffany & Co. is a long-running legal battle, it has been started on Valentine’s Day in 2013.  Tiffany & Co. sued Costco for infringement, and certainly the date Valentine’s Day for opening the law case was an additional advertisment for diamond engagement rings of Tiffany & Co. The luxury jeweler was confirmed by the New York court already in 2016. The decision of the New York court was that Costco should pay back its profits, which it made from the rings.  Costco was ordered to pay $13.75m in damages and legal costs for infringing the trademark. But because Costco has been accused of selling about 2,500 of the counterfeit rings, in the new decision of the US District Court, Southern District of New York, the damage was increased. The court distinguishes between compensatory and punitive damages. The amount of the punitive damages is not changened in comparison with the judgement in 2016, but the compensatory amount was increased from US 5,5 million to US 11,1 million.

 

Is using the assoziation of a famous brand a trademark infringement?

fingerringCostco had argued that they hadn’t sold counterfeit and imitation for real. Their customers must not have the association of an original luxury ring by Tiffany, because the rings were not sold using Tiffany’s trademark blue boxes. And Costco claimed that “Tiffany” described the type of ring rather than claiming to be made by Tiffany & Co. and therefore it could been used. The court didn’t accept this argumentation, however. And it decided that in addition to the payment of damages Costco is barred from using “Tiffany” standing alone without attributes like “setting,” “set” or “style”. Nevertheless Costco said in a statement that it plans to appeal the ruling, CNN reported.

Costco Wholesale Corp. used not only Tiffany’s name for luxury association, but other brand names as well. On September 14th 2017, for example watches by Breitling, Cartier and Rolex were on sale on Costco’s website (https://www.costco.com). This kind of business strategy implies risks concerning getting accused of trademark infringement. But of course, not all businesses choose to register their trademark. Or sometimes they are even to late and somebody else has already registered the word and figurative mark. Especially in China this can be a significant danger, because in Chinese trademark law enshrines the principle of prior application; where two or more applicants apply to register identical or similar trademarks in respect of the same or similar goods, the Trademark Office will approve for publication the mark with the earliest application date and reject the other trademark applications.

European trademark law tries to protect famous marks

In Europe the trademark law tries to protect famous marks: The use of a registered European trademark in comparative advertisement can be considered as an IP-infringement and famous marks with extensive reputation may constitute a ground for cancellation, even for goods or services not included in trademark registrations. Lot’s of law cases and decisions about infringement of intellectual property show the will in the EU to grant reliable protection for patents and trademarks.

Maybe those cases about famous marks and IP-infringement are interesting for you:

  • Another copying of brand design: Gucci sues fashion chain Forever 21
  • Right after launch in the US: Kroger sues Lidl for trademark infringement
  • Chinese Court ruled infringement of domestic shoemakers: “N” logo and footwear New Balance
  • Retro video game vs. modern advertising clip: Atari accused Nestlé of copyright infringement

 

You want international protection for your trademark or your patent?

Then please do not hesitate to contact us. We will help you protect your Intellectual Property rights. Additionally, our lawyers are licensed to represent you at every German court!

Take your chance and request a call-back without any obligations at:

CAT-call_en
 

Sources:

magazine The Trademark Lawyer

CNN

pictures: Hans / pixabay.com / CC0 License ||  ColiN00B /pixabay.com / CCO License  || Fingerringe Hans / Pixabay.com / CCO License

 

 

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet 
  • share 

Category iconProduct- and Trademark piracy Tag iconU.S.

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Product- and Trademark piracy

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022
  • EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible 24. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

14. February 2022
Crypto trading: NFT for luxury and art

Crypto trading: NFT for luxury and art

11. February 2022
Shipwreck for Iglo: lawsuit over figure Käpt’n Iglo

Shipwreck for Iglo: lawsuit over figure Käpt’n Iglo

21. December 2021
EUIPO/OECD: Online shopping is TOP for counterfeit products

EUIPO/OECD: Online shopping is TOP for counterfeit products

31. August 2021
Swiss Army Knife: Swiss flag not allowed on Chinese products

Swiss Army Knife: Swiss flag not allowed on Chinese products

26. August 2021
Chinese VW-Käfer causes uproar – design theft?

Chinese VW-Käfer causes uproar – design theft?

13. July 2021
OLG Schleswig: cease and desist declaration without penalty clause

OLG Schleswig: cease and desist declaration without penalty clause

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

© Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]