The legal battle between luxury goods giant Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. (LVMH) and Haute Diggity Dog, a small dog toy company, over the latter's "Chewy Vuitton" line of dog toys provides a fascinating case study in trademark law, specifically focusing on the intersection of parody and fair use. The case, *Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC*, (various citations exist, including *Vuitton Malletier v. Haute Diggity*, 507 F.3d 252, and others referencing the case in different courts and publications: *Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 06*; *Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d*; *Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, et al*; *Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC United*; *LOUIS VUITTON MALLETIER S.A. v. HAUTE DIGGITY DOG*) ultimately hinged on the question of whether Haute Diggity Dog's playful imitation constituted a trademark infringement or a protected parody. The outcome offers valuable insight into the complexities of applying trademark law to expressive works.
LVMH, renowned for its iconic monogrammed canvas and globally recognized brand, filed suit against Haute Diggity Dog alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. The heart of the dispute lay in Haute Diggity Dog's "Chewy Vuitton" line, a series of squeaky dog toys designed to resemble Louis Vuitton's signature handbags and luggage. The toys, though clearly referencing LVMH's designs, featured a playful twist: the recognizable LV monogram was replaced with "Chewy Vuiton," a clear pun highlighting the chewable nature of the product and its intended canine consumer.
LVMH argued that the "Chewy Vuiton" toys created a likelihood of consumer confusion, diluting their brand and potentially leading consumers to believe that LVMH was endorsing or producing the dog toys. They emphasized the strength of their trademarks, their extensive investment in brand protection, and the potential harm to their luxury image associated with a product intended for canine consumption. The argument rested on the traditional principles of trademark infringement, focusing on the potential for consumer confusion and the dilution of brand value. LVMH presented evidence of their substantial marketing efforts and the iconic status of their monogram, arguing that Haute Diggity Dog's appropriation of these elements unfairly leveraged their brand recognition.
current url：https://rgsoru.e518c.com/blog/louis-vuitton-malletier-sa-v-haute-diggity-dog-35963