Christian Louboutin S.A. v. Yves Saint Laurent America Holding, Inc.

696 F.3d 206 (2nd Cir. 2012)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P, a designer of high-fashion women's footwear and accessories, has since 1992 painted the 'outsoles' of his women's high-heeled shoes with a high-gloss red lacquer. In 2008, P registered the red lacquered outsole as a trademark with the PTO. It was called the Red Sole Mark. D began selling monochrome shoes where each upper sole, outsole, and heel were all the same color. D make shoes in purple, yellow, green, and red. P sued D for trademark infringement. P moved for a preliminary injunction. D counterclaimed in that the mark was invalid because it was ornamental or functional. The court denied P’s injunction reasoning that protection could not be given to a single color in the fashion industry. P appealed. P argues that the District Court erred in (1) holding, based on the doctrine of 'aesthetic functionality,' that the Red Sole Mark was not entitled to legal protection; (2) applying the doctrine of aesthetic functionality to hold that a single color on a fashion item could not act as a trademark; (3) failing to give weight to the statutory presumption of validity deriving from the Red Sole Mark's registration; (4) applying an improper analysis of trademark infringement and dilution; (5) ignoring allegedly undisputed proof of likelihood of confusion and irreparable harm; and (6) announcing a per se rule of functionality in a manner that violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52.