A coalition of luxury jewelry makers has won a preliminary injunction to stop an online retailer from using certain language when marketing goods. In an order filed Nov. 3 in federal court in Manhattan, a judge prohibited Overstockjeweler.com from using the terms “replica,” “reproduction,” “copy,” “faux,” “fake,” “imitation,” “look-a-like,” “made in the likeness of,” “-esque,” and “knock off” in reference to Cartier, Van Cleef & Arpels, Gucci and Bulgari or their trademarks. The brands filed suit against the Web site and its owner, Ellen Castaneda, in September 2007 alleging trademark, copyright and trade dress infringement. After the initial filing, the defendants said they had ceased using the brand names with the language in question. The manufacturers alleged in later proceedings that the Web site continued to do so. The injunction also applies to a similar suit filed by jewelry design firm Yurman Studio against Overstockjeweler.com in February 2007. The retailer did not return a call seeking comment.
This story first appeared in the November 10, 2008 issue of WWD. Subscribe Today.
A federal judge has entered a default judgment in favor of Urban Outfitters Inc. in a trademark suit it brought against Hype Outfitters Inc. in 2005. According to the judgment, filed in federal court in Manhattan in September, Hype failed to replace its attorney after he left the case in September 2007. Judge Richard Sullivan ordered the New York-based apparel and accessories store to find a new lawyer or explain why it could not. In December, without an explanation from Hype, Sullivan ordered the company to further explain why a default judgment should not be filed against it. When it failed to do that, Sullivan ruled in favor of Urban Outfitters. In its initial complaint, Urban Outfitters accused Hype of infringing on its trademark in a window display bearing the phrase “urban outfitting” and with shopping bags that made use of the phrase “urban outfitters.” On Oct. 30, Urban Outfitters submitted a memorandum asking that it be awarded Hype Outfitters’ gross sales as profits as well as attorneys’ fees as damages, a total of $1.6 million. A phone number listed for Hype Outfitters was not in service.