Model Behaviour

With Toronto's Fashion Week kicking off this week, Toronto's streets have been filled with models strutting between "go sees" for the last couple of weeks.  We thought this would be a good opportunity to see what's happening on the modelling side of the fashion industry. 

 

CanadaFashionLaw has taken note of a growing awareness within the fashion industry of health issues specific to fashion models.  Click here to read up on some retailers' fresh approach to their advertisements.  Also, click here to read up on how models are taking matters into their own hands to create a more healthy work environment.

 

Refreshingly, this past weekend Ryerson's School of Fashion hosted a conference dedicated to advocating for increased diversity on the catwalk, including age, size and race. 

 

Across the border, a number of modelling agencies have found themselves to be in hot water over a class action suit claiming that the agencies have been mixing agency funds with funds held on behalf of their models and profiting off the interest accrued. 

 

This is not the first time that modelling agencies have been involved in a class action suit in the US.  In fact, in 2005 they were subject to a multi-million dollar suit for fixing rates and commissions between agencies.

 

 

 

 

Be It Resolved: IP Really Is Everywhere!

Relishing the opportunity to watch smart, meaningful and intelligent debate, CanadaFashionLaw has been seriously enjoying the US election debates.  Imagine our delight when intellectual property laws and counterfeiting snuck into the second presidential debate, albeit for a few precious seconds.  It got us thinking…what is the significance of a country’s domestic intellectual property laws? 

Intellectual property laws are critical to businesses.  Intellectual property laws protect significant business assets.  They protect ingenuity, creativity, inventiveness…the list goes on and on.  At the end of the day, intellectual property laws enhance entrepreneurship, which can only encourage the private sector to flourish and thus benefit a country’s economy.

But not all countries treat intellectual property the same and this can significantly impact the private sector’s decision making, not only in terms of where the business operates but also in respect of the country in which it chooses to enforce its rights.  A country that has weaker intellectual property laws may attracts fewer foreign businesses to those markets.  (A previous article on CanadaFashionLaw looked at the business rational behind multi-jurisdictional litigation.) 

As fabulous as Canada’s private sector is, Canada needs to attract foreign businesses to help keep the Canadian economy robust.  Strong intellectual property laws can be a carrot to bringing those businesses to our market.  The intellectual property law community recognizes this and wants to work with and advocate for businesses to help shape intellectual property laws that assist businesses flourish in our economy.  For example, the Intellectual Property Institute of Canada (“IPIC”) ensures that it brings intellectual property law issues to the table at international trade negotiations.  IPIC and your intellectual property law professional are always interested in hearing about the challenges that the private sector faces when launching their business in Canada. 

Don’t be shy speak up!  Help us help you.

End of the Road for Christian Louboutin v. Yves Saint Laurent

It appears that fashion's most infamous case has finally come to a close.  If you want to read up on the Christian Louboutin v. Yves Saint Laurent case, you'll find a full summary here.  Both parties seemingly came away from the Appeal decision satisfied: Christian Louboutin's trade-mark registration remained valid and exclusivity was maintained with respect to red soles with contrasting shoes; Yves Saint Laurent was found not to infringe with respect to its red shoes, red soles color configuration.

 

As of today (October 16), Yves Saint Laurent has filed submissions with the Appeals court seeking it dismiss its various counterclaims against Christian Louboutin.  It appears that both parties are intent on putting this matter behind them and continue to focus on their respective businesses. 

Speaking Engagements on Fashion Law

The summer is over and tans are starting to fade.  September came with a vengeance and is almost over.  It's been a busy time here at CanadaFashionLaw and it appears that it is only going to get more busy.  But we love all things fashionably legal and so we're up for the challenge.

 

Below is a quick summary of a number of speaking engagements coming up for CanadaFashionLaw owner, author and operator, Ashlee Froese:

 

• Presenting at the Intellectual Property Institute of Canada on October 12, 2012 in Vancouver, British Columbia on protection fashion designs in Canada through intellectual property laws;
• Speaking at the Queen's Business Forum on the Fashion Industry on November 2, 2012 in Kingston, Ontario on laws affecting the fashion industry;
• Hosting a legal roundtable series on laws affecting the fashion industry throughout 2012 and 2013 with the Fashion Group International - Toronto Chapter;
• Hosting a roundtable discussion at the International Trademarks Association in Dallas, Texas on May 8, 2013 on Navigating Through Non-Traditional Trade-Marks and Industrial Design to Protect Fashion Designs.

If you're interested in attending any or all of these events, please feel free to reach out for further information.

 
 

 

Mon Dieu: Chanel Accused of Counterfeiting

France is known for its fashion.  Perhaps more importantly within the fashion world, France is known as being one of the last remaining champions of the petites mains: highly skilled tailors and seamstresses that are the “behind the scenes” technicians to Europe’s most notorious haute couture fashion houses.  In a surprising David v. Goliath decision, France demonstrated its support to the petites mains. 

World Tricot was a knitwear supplier to Chanel.  In 2009, World Tricot commenced an action against Chanel after it discovered a Chanel-branded cardigan for sale bearing a striking resemblance to knitwear created by World Tricot.  Claiming ownership rights over the knitwear design, World Tricot sought damages for counterfeiting and wrongful termination of a business relationship.  Chanel vehemently denied these allegations and counterclaimed that World Tricot was publicly disparaging Chanel’s reputation and goodwill.  Moreover, Chanel stated that they had never been accused of stealing the designs of a supplier in any of their 400+ supplier arrangements. 

At the trial level, Chanel was successful.  However, World Tricot stood its ground by appealing the decision, which ultimately resulted in Chanel paying €200,000 in damages for counterfeiting.  In today’s economy where manufacturing is globally outsourced and the domestic small shop is coming under increasing pressure, this decision is likely welcomed by France’s domestic manufacturers.  The decision is definitely a boost for the small business in the fashion industry.  There is no word yet on whether Chanel will appeal this decision to the French Supreme Court.