It's just another day in the mad, mad world of fashion. kate spade new york, the eponymous U.S.-based fashion brand is launching "kate spade Saturday," a brand whose name is being disputed by a similarly-coined NYC retailer.

The diffusion line is making its debut in Japan via an online store and a retail location in Tokyo—complete with an American-style café—with plans to have an online presence in Brazil and the U.S. later this spring. (A "sneak peek" at selected items from the new brand was offered on Fab.com through today, February 20.) CEO Craig Leavitt said the brand "saw an opportunity in the market to engage a new customer base—one that aspires to be part of the kate spade new york brand."

The new sub-brand will feature apparel, a beauty line and home decor at a notch below typical kate spade prices, with a target demographic of consumers ages 25 to 35. The price point will be "about 50 percent below" the kate spade brand, and its retail experience promises to thread digital throughout the graphic, pop art-inspired clothes. However, the brand's introduction has not been without some controversy.Continue reading...

Describing something that is oversized may soon involve a lawyer. The terms “titanic” and “gigantic” are both being considered for trademarking.

The man behind the plan, Clive Palmer, is an Australian billionaire who is having the Titanic completely re-created by a Chinese shipyard so it can set sail from England for North America in 2016. Palmer’s Blue Star Line, named after White Star Line, the company that owned the original Titanic, has filed a trademark request for a number of terms, including "Titanic," "Titanic II," "Titanic III," "Blue Star Line," and "Gigantic", although he's already promoting "Titanic II" on his website.

Palmer, a mining tycoon, believes that White Star Line had thought about naming one of its ships Gigantic, but never got around to it after its Titanic liner famously slammed into an iceberg near Newfoundland and sank, taking more than 1,500 lives along with it. “I think [the trademark application] will be OK,” Palmer said, according to Australia’s Boorowa News. “We'll just see how we go. I think there is a report back on it already, saying it is OK for a ship.”

However, there is some debate as to what he'll be able to trademark.Continue reading...

Tiffany is more than irked at Costco for selling diamond engagement rings as "Tiffany" rings. The luxury jeweler last week formally filed suit against the wholesale retail giant.

Costco CEO Craig Jelinek commented in an internal email communication that was sent to all employees this evening [Feb. 18, 8:27 pm EST], "We are disappointed that our efforts to resolve the issue with them did not result in an amicable solution as we had hoped."

Jelinek also acknowledged that the retailer erred by using the word "Tiffany" in describing the engagement rings:

"That was intended to describe a setting style used in those rings, and was not intended to claim that the rings were of any particular brand. In retrospect, it would have been better had we not used that description the way we did."

Below, read Costco's company-wide email:Continue reading...

Editor's note: This article has been updated with comment by lululemon.

In the $14 billion women’s athletic apparel market, heir apparent Lululemon is facing a direct challenge by Ellie, the latest startup incubated by L.A.-based Science.

Pledging the same quality of workout gear at half the price, Ellie's approach eschews sophisticated tech in favor of consumer demand gauged by social media: items are first introduced on Facebook to gauge reaction and test trend strength.

“With an on-site pattern-maker, they can showcase designs they are testing across social media to get users/fans to decide if they like them, and if it’s popular, the outfit is manufactured within four days and available for mass market retail,” a rep told VentureBeat. “That’s lightning speed for clothing manufacturing.”Continue reading...

Editor's note: This article has been updated with comment by lululemon.

In the $14 billion women’s athletic apparel market, heir apparent Lululemon is facing a direct challenge by Ellie, the latest startup incubated by L.A.-based Science.

Pledging the same quality of workout gear at half the price, Ellie's approach eschews sophisticated tech in favor of consumer demand gauged by social media: items are first introduced on Facebook to gauge reaction and test trend strength.

“With an on-site pattern-maker, they can showcase designs they are testing across social media to get users/fans to decide if they like them, and if it’s popular, the outfit is manufactured within four days and available for mass market retail,” a rep told VentureBeat. “That’s lightning speed for clothing manufacturing.”Continue reading...

Nike’s Air Force 1 just celebrated 30 years, hitting stores way back in 1982 as the first basketball shoe to use its Nike Air technology. It’s been a huge success for the brand, and has become a collector’s item for sneakerheads. Its recent appearance in front of the Supreme Court, normally a place where sneakers don't dare to tread, may only increase its appeal to collectors.

The trouble began back in 2009 when a small shoemaker, Already LLC, which makes Yums sneakers was sued by Nike for infringing on its Air Force 1 trademark with the design of its Soulja Boy shoes.

The Yums brand owner responded countersued before Nike “issued a covenant not to sue, promising not to raise any trademark or unfair competition claims against Already or any affiliated entity based on Already’s existing footwear designs, or any future Already designs,” World Trademark Review reports. “Nike then moved to dismiss its claims with prejudice, and to dismiss Already’s counterclaim without prejudice on the ground that the covenant had extinguished the case or controversy.”Continue reading...

Mickey D’s, the Golden Arches, McD's, McDonaldos, Macca's. McDonald’s has plenty of nicknames worldwide, but you’ll never roll up to a franchise of the 72-year-old brand and find any of them on the restaurant’s official sign.

After all, the company has entered into plenty of trademark suits in attempts to protect its name. It lost a fight against Malaysia’s McCurry in 2009, but won its battle against the Philippines’ MacJoy. In the ’90s, thanks to the work of the McDonald’s legal team, San Francisco coffee shop owner Kathleen McCaughey had to change the name McCoffee even though it had existed with that name for 17 years. But McDonald’s is still thwarted in the Cayman Islands, thanks to a local entrepreneur's MacDonald's Family Restaurant there.

Even while its lawyers are busy protecting the brand name and trademarks, the corporation is letting its Australian team have a bit of fun with the name. The brand is affectionately called Macca’s Down Under, and the company has decided to adopt the nickname officially on signs at 13 outlets, on social media and in its advertising for a limited promotion that kicks off today and runs through Feb. 4th.Continue reading...

Candy and chocolate generally bring happiness to most folks, but they also are keeping a few law firms working overtime.

The latest ruling finds Nestle winning a case that Cadbury had brought against it to try and stop the trademarking of the shape of its Kit Kat bars. Cadbury had taken offense at Nestlé’s 2006 trademarking of Kit Kat as “four trapezoidal bars aligned on a rectangular base.”

After all, as TheHindu.com notes, Cadbury has its own similar chocolate bar, the Crispello, which has a “creamy centre, wrapped in a delicate crispy shell, covered with a delicious layer of Cadbury chocolate.”

But sorry, Cadbury. This time, you lose. Cadbury’s legal team will just have to remember how sweet it felt to beat Nestle recently in a battle over the color purple.Continue reading...