Take the Lambuten. Legal cord
Second grade heifers discovered the Louboutins, who are called differently. First grade heifers have been up to date and suffer. Those who are too lazy to suffer - buy striptease shoes, it is about the same, but cheaper N times and without a red sole. Just we see it in the clip. Or not her, I am not so strong in these calf nuances.
In fairness, she slipped on her heels in vain. Fawn.
Now let's move on to the legal nuances of supporting the Chinese manufacturer, since the sales of these beautiful slippers seem to have jumped everywhere except the official distribution point .
So. Louboutin’s music story is not the first, the insured ass Lopez has already been bent in this place:
The cord, by the way, is not worse at all, for my taste. Put it too, for the story.
The context consists of additional adventures in the form of an exhibition by Van Gogh, which immediately cut through the chip and did what people call situational marketing: it stated that it can be visited for free, if only in high heels. Since the press immediately wrote that in Louboutin it is possible to Van Gogh (which is predictable), Louboutin (yes, it also bothers me to call him this or that, but this, but I adhere to the original sources) got out with complaints .
A good example is that before making claims, it would be better to find out if you look weird.
In fact, there are no violations of copyright and trademark rights, which does not allow prohibiting the mention of the brand name in the press. For example, 3M, the copyright holder of the SKOTCH trademark (yes, it is a valid and protected trademark), prohibits the use of its designation only when selling products (asks to be replaced with adhesive tape), but does not prohibit use in other cases.
Let’s figure out what kind of rights Christian has.
In Russia, several trademarks were registered in the name of Christian Louboutin:
But the most interesting is the registration of a trademark in the form of a red sole. The international registration mark No. 1031242 is the color Pantone N 18.1663TP, designed for the sole of women's shoes.
See, the heel is not tinted
At first, Lubuten in Russia was denied registration of the red sole. Reason: the designation does not have a distinctive ability: any color or color combination in shoes cannot be the subject of exclusive rights, and should be freely used by various manufacturers of shoes (from the conclusion of the Patent Disputes Chamber).
Louboutin challenged the decision of Rospatent. Link to the conclusion of the Chamber of Patent Disputes following the consideration of the case: pravo.ru/store/doc/doc/201201577_031212.pdf
Main arguments of Louboutin: the red sole is a unique and well-known hallmark of Christian Louboutin women's shoes, associated with consumers all over the world, including Russia, with the applicant’s products. The applicant does not claim the exclusive right to use red as such in relation to shoes in general, is a red color of a special tone applied to the sole of women's shoes.
Arguments of the chamber: the designation acquired distinctive ability as a result of use. The applicant’s products, which are widely known to consumers in the Russian Federation, are popular, and that this designation is perceived by the consumer as a trademark of the manufacturer of the goods. The red color on the sole does not perform any other function than the design element, and fixing the rights to use one manufacturer will not affect the rights of other manufacturers of women's shoes.
1. You can register anything as a trademark, not just a red sole, but just a color - for example, Tiffany Blue color is a registered trademark, but also sound (for example, a mobile ringtone) and even smell (like the smell of horse sweat registered for car seats). The main thing is to be able to derive benefit from the designation. Christian succeeded, and you should succeed.
2. Despite the aggression of Russian representatives, you can still use Cord and his work as advertising allusions, mentioning a trademark in personal communication, correspondence or in the press is not a violation of rights. Fundamentally a violation is when you profit and pass off your goods as someone else’s, that is, you use them in the sale and promotion.
3. You can’t make red-soled calf shoes if you are not Chinese, who saw all these rights in a coffin.
4. Lambuten, this is the same as Abidas in sneakers, but in shoes.
© Gotovtsev, Mityagin