Close Menu
X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In the case of Louboutin v. Yves Saint Laurent, the other shoe has dropped. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled this week that French designer Christian Louboutin’s distinctive red-soled shoes are entitled to at least limited trademark protection, reversing a lower court holding that “a single color can never serve as a trademark in the fashion industry.” The decision also shed some light on the often-confounding “doctrine of aesthetic functionality.” The court’s ruling made attorneys for the French designer very happy, with Harley Lewin of McCarter & English, who represented Louboutin, saying, “We got essentially what we wanted: We got affirmation that Louboutin’s mark is valid and enforceable, and we now have a clear statement of the methodology that needs to be followed in cases of this kind.” Ironically, the appellate decision also pleased Yves Saint Laurent and its attorneys, as it allows the fashion house to continue to sell its monochromatic shoe with a red sole—the very shoe Louboutin alleged was infringing. The three-judge panel instructed the U.S. Patent and Trade Office to limit the registration of Louboutin’s “Red Sole Mark” to only those situations in which the red lacquered outsole contrasts in color with the adjoining “upper” of the shoe. So while both parties profess to be satisfied with the outcome—and New York City’s Fashion Week can proceed with models, celebrities, and fashionistas knowing their high-priced, red-soled Louboutins will not be mistaken for another brand—the court’s decision also clarifies an aspect of trademark law that attorneys often found confusing and vague. “The court found that the fashion industry could not be singled out as the one industry in which color could not be trademarked, and it clarified the doctrine of aesthetic functionality,” said Susan Scafidi, a professor of fashion law at Fordham University School of Law. “This doctrine is a somewhat obscure provision of the law.” Michelle Mancino Marsh, an attorney at Kenyon & Kenyon who has written about the case, agreed. At first glance, she said, the court appears to have issued a narrow decision. But it actually does more: “It makes clear that the aesthetic functionality defense it is alive and well, and spells out the test that will be applied in the future when it’s used as a defense,” she said. To understand aesthetic functionality, it helps to take a closer look at the Louboutin case. First filed in April 2011, Louboutin sued Yves Saint Laurent, alleging one of its shoe designs—a monochromatic red shoe that included a red outer sole—infringed its trademark on a shoe with a red outsole and violated the Lanham Act. In August 2011, Southern District Court Judge Victor Marrero denied Louboutin’s motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling that the law did not allow “recognition of a trademark for the use of a single color for fashion items.” “This is where he went wrong,” according to Scafadi, who said she attended the appellate argument in January wearing a pair of Louboutins. “I think the court was offended that he was creating a per se rule that was industry specific.” Marrero had cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co., a case that involved industrial products and found that a color could be trademarked if it had no significant function except to identify a product’s maker. In a creatively written decision that quoted a Jennifer Lopez song, paraphrased Walt Whitman’s Leaves of Grass, and attempted to draw parallels to an art-history hypothetical situation (in which Pablo Picasso tries to stop Claude Monet from painting water lilies in a distinctive color of indigo that Picasso had used during his blue period), Marrero said that in fashion, color is always “functional,” as it is a useful aesthetic feature of design. He concluded, therefore, that in fashion, color could not be trademarked. But the appellate panel, which included Judges Jose Cabranes, Chester Straub, and Debra Livingston, said the Qualitex decision cannot be read to sanction an industry-specific per se rule of functionality, but rather requires an individualized, fact-based inquiry into the nature of the trademark. If the mark passes the functionality test, it still must “be shown not to have a significant effect on competition in order to receive trademark protection,” the panel wrote. The Second Circuit’s Louboutin decision will likely influence future cases involving the aesthetic functionally defense, but there is still widespread disagreement on the issue among the circuits, said Robert Zelnick, a partner at McDermott, Will & Emery who specializes in trademark law. Indeed, in a footnote, the panel noted that the Seventh Circuit has applied the doctrine of aesthetic functionality liberally, holding that “[f]ashion is a form of function,” while the Fifth Circuit “rejects the doctrine . . . entirely.” “But the Second Circuit’s decision will help other courts,” Marsh noted. “They set out a test, and that will have an impact on how other courts apply the doctrine.” Ultimately, the court ruled that Louboutin was eligible for limited trademark protection on its distinctive red-soles and found that YSL’s monochromatic shoes did not infringe Louboutin’s trademark. “This was a win-win for fashion, in that a major player gets to keep and enforce its mark and another major player saves face by successfully defending against infringement,” said Marsh, adding that for Louboutin, which was looking for a flat-out affirmation of its mark, “this probably wasn’t the best test case.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

More From ALM

Premium Subscription

With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
View Now

Team Accounts

Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
View Now

Bundle Subscriptions

Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
View Now

Legalweek(year) 2021

February 02, 2021 - July 14, 2021
Virtual

Legalweek(year) will bring together thousands of legal professionals for a series of 5 innovative virtual legal events.


Register

General Counsel Conference Midwest: SuperConference 2021

July 26, 2021 - July 27, 2021
Chicago, IL

GCC Midwest addresses today's legal issues facing companies by providing general counsel with insight and best practices.


Register

General Counsel Summit (GCS) 2021

September 07, 2021 - September 08, 2021
Sydney

General Counsel Summit is the premier event for in-house counsel, hosting esteemed legal minds from all sectors of the economy.


Register

Real Estate, Mid-Senior level Associate – Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES, California, United States

The Real Estate practice group of our client’s Los Angeles office is seeking a highly qualified mid-senior level associate with experi...


Apply Now ›

Personal Injury Attorney -Texas

Houston, Texas, United States

Houston based Plaintiffs' personal injury firm with a busy litigation practice is looking for an experienced Plaintiffs' personal injury lit...


Apply Now ›

Paralegal- Texas

Houston, Texas, United States

The Law Officers of Domingo Garcia, personal injury law firm with a busy litigation practice seeks Paralegal who has experience (a) respondi...


Apply Now ›

COMPASS LEGAL MARKETING

04/12/2021
DBR Web

RIVERO MESTRE IS PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE OUR LATEST RECOGNITIONS, RIVERO MESTRE NAMED FIRM OF THE YEAR IN THE 2021 BENCHMARK FLORIDA LITIGATION GUIDE. CHAMBERS NAMES RIVERO MESTRE OUTSTANDING FIRM FOR FURTHERING DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION. ANDRES RIVERO, JORGE A.


View Announcement ›

LOMBARDI & LOMBARDI

04/12/2021
NJLJ Web

LOMBARDI & LOMBARDI, P.A. PROUDLY WELCOMES JAMIE D. HAPPAS P.J. Cv. (Ret.)


View Announcement ›

BRACH EICHLER LLC

04/05/2021
NJLJ Web

Please to announce...


View Announcement ›

Subscribe to Corporate Counsel

Don't miss the crucial news and insights you need to make informed legal decisions. Join Corporate Counsel now!

Unlimited access to Corporate Counsel
Access to additional free ALM publications
1 free article* across the ALM subscription network every 30 days
Exclusive discounts on ALM events and publications
Join Corporate Counsel

Already have an account? Sign In