Intellectual Property in the Fashion Industry Conference, London 2013

The Goss-IPgirl attended this year’s Intellectual Property in the Fashion Industry Conference 2013 chaired by IP guru and blogmeister, Jeremy Phillips. The one-day conference, now in its eighth year, discussed some of the big court decisions in the world of fashion, and provided tailored advice and analysis from leading IP experts.

The morning opened with Roy Crozier (Clarke Willmott LLP) who discussed the problems of counterfeiting and its current means of distribution and what could be done to tackle the issue. Robert Cumming (Appleyard Lees), delivered a great talk on trademark law and the legal problems and pitfalls of selling infringing fashion goods in the retail sector, and whether trademark law provides a defence provision that exempts a trader for liability for an innocent infringement.  After an in depth analysis of the law, the conclusion was no, and that likewise, neither copyright law or the law of passing off offers any protection for an innocent seller of protected works.  

Drawing our attention to the Jimmy Choo case, Robert was quick to highlight that despite the availability of a defence for innocent infringement for UK registered and unregistered designs. For community registered and unregistered designs there is no provision and following the case of J.Choo v Towerstone Ltd, here, nor in the future, is there likely to be one.

Next to speak was Laetitia Lagarde, and from fashion names to trademarks Lagarde Laetita gave an insightful overview of the position of fashion brands in the courts, discussing some of the most talked about fashion trademark cases that have impacted the business and world of fashion, of these included: 

Gucci v Guess, over who has rights to that famous "G". Where the parties fought fiercely over the latter's use of marks said to be similar to those of the Italian company. Whom accused Guess of counterfeiting, unfair competition and trademark infringement, claiming that Guess had duplicated Gucci's logo on a line of shoes. Interestingly, while Gucci managed to claim success in the US courts on the matter, it failed to enforce its right on its home turf. Highlighting the contrasting approach of the courts with regard to fashion trademark claims.

Laetitia also threw light onto the contrasting approach taken by the courts in the French and US famous Louboutin red sole shoes case. In the context of 'similar and identical' Lagarde Laetita gave us her impressions of what constitutes a "similar" mark to the famous red sole, giving emphasis to just how red in colour a shoe sole needs to be to infringe Louboutin’s rights.

The final speakers of the afternoon discussed cases from the fast fashion industry in particular Berwin Leighton Paisner's Simon Clark took a close look at the facts and legal issues pertaining to Karen Millen v Dunnes Stores, which the Irish Supreme Court has referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union.  

And closing the IPKATs Eleonora Rosati looked at the very relevant topic of the relationship of fashion photographs to European human rights law, and in particular Freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, culminating around three journalists who sought to exploit their fashion show photos which was eventually the subject of a ruling of the European Court of Human Rights in Ashby Donald v France (here, noted by Eleonora for the IPKat here), Eleonora then asked some difficult questions: for example, are photographs which were taken at fashion shows without any effort or skill other than the pressing of the camera shutter considered eligible for copyright protection?

For a more detailed report of the topics and discussions on the day, check out the IPKAT blog here.