Target Corp.’s goal of offering its bargain-conscious customers the latest runway looks is running afoul of those who charge designer prices for the real thing.
The Minneapolis-based Target is facing a number of lawsuits by designers and clothing companies, several based in the Los Angeles area, that have become more aggressive in protecting their intellectual property.
Two suits in particular have drawn plenty of attention. Coach Inc. sued Target in late September for trademark infringement after a black market purse with Coach tags was found on Target’s shelves.
Vernon-based Lucky Brand Dungarees Inc. a few weeks later filed a copyright infringement against Target and Maximum Exposure, which designs one of the retailer’s house lines. Lucky alleged that Maximum Exposure’s floral-embroidery and rear-pocket look were similar enough to infringe on its designs.
Westlake Village-based K-Swiss Inc. filed a trademark infringement suit against the retailer this spring. Fort Worth, Texas-based Bombay Company Inc. also has sued. All either declined to comment or could not be reached.
Target isn’t the only company facing this kind of litigation. The Fendi Adele division of Paris-based LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA recently filed a trademark infringement suit against Benton, Ark.-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
The suits may not mean the retailers are cutting corners to deliver hip wares. Michael Wachtell of Buchalter Nemer PC said designers and manufacturers are more vigilant about protecting their intellectual property.
“Brands are becoming extremely savvy about protecting designs and intellectual property,” Wachtell said. “They spend huge amounts of money in developing brand identification and price identification.”
John Stephens at Sedgwick Detert Moran & Arnold LLP noted that designers are lobbying Congress for protection of designs and cuts of clothing just like works of art. David McDowell of Morrison & Foerster LLP, who represents Target on some intellectual property matters, said it isn’t a trend The timing of the suits is a coincidence, he said.
“The problem is if we’re the seller, we can potentially be held liable and people elect to sue the retailer rather than the person who’s actually responsible,” McDowell said. “They can sue Target and make them figure it out.”
