Victor Victorious
Back in November, I blogged about the case going to the Supreme Court in which Victoria's Secret was suing a small adult novelty store in Elizabethtown, KY called Victor's Little Secret for hurting its trademark. In a common sense ruling, the Supreme Court ruled against Victoria's Secret.
"Use of the name 'Victor's Little Secret' neither confused any consumers or potential consumers, nor was likely to do so," Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court.The fact that a consumer may make the mental association between a famous trademark and a knockoff is not the same thing as showing that the famous name was damaged, Stevens wrote.
A win for the little guy!
Thanks to both Jon and Justin for bring this to my attention.
Comments
I will keep an eye out for skimpy underwear "just" for informational purposes. I might even add stilettoes and garters and stockings with the seam up the back to my watch list.
Posted by: Justin | March 6, 2003 12:34 PM