Gucci America, Inc. v. Guess?, Inc.
868 F. Supp. 2d 207
S.D.N.Y.2012Background
- Gucci sues Guess and related licensees for trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, dilution, false designation, and related claims over five Gucci designs (GRG Stripe, Repeating GG Pattern/Diamond Motif, Stylized G, Script Gucci) used on over 1000 Gucci-branded SKUs.
- Gucci seeks cancellation of Guess’s Quattro G Pattern registration on abandonment grounds; Guess answers and asserts defenses including innocent use and laches.
- Judge held a bench trial (2012) after earlier partial summary judgments; amended opinion/revised damage calculations but unchanged legal analysis.
- Gucci presents evidence of extensive advertising and consumer recognition; Guess argues differences in market positioning and lack of confusion, including post-sale confusion concerns.
- The court analyzes claims under the Lanham Act and New York law, applying Polaroid factors and dilution standards, and issues remedies including profits disgorgement and injunctive relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trademark infringement and post-sale confusion doctrine | Gucci argues Defendants’ Quattro G, GRG Stripe, Stylized G infringed Gucci marks. | Guess asserts non-infringement due to differences, lack of confusion, and weak mark strength in some designs. | Gucci prevailed on infringement for Quattro G (brown/beige) and GRG Stripe; partial success on Stylized G; Script Gucci not infringed. |
| Dilution (blurring) under Lanham Act and NY GBL § 360-1 | Gucci contends marks are famous and copied causing dilution by blurring. | Guess argues dilution not sufficiently proven for some marks; some marks not strong or pre-dating fame. | Dilution found for Quattro G (brown/beige) and GRG Stripe; no dilution for Stylized G/Scripts in certain contexts. |
| Cancellation of Guess’s Quattro G Pattern registration | Gucci seeks cancellation due to abandonment. | Guess asserts ongoing use and no abandonment; orientation change not abandonment. | Registration canceled due to abandonment (Quattro G Pattern) although not all uses were abandoned; overall termination for the registered mark. |
Key Cases Cited
- Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763 (U.S. 1992) (trade dress protection requires proof of likelihood of confusion)
- Louis Vuitton Malletier v. Dooney & Bourke, Inc., 454 F.3d 108 (2d Cir. 2006) (Polaroid likelihood-of-confusion framework; dilution considerations)
- Virgin Enters. Ltd. v. Nawab, 335 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 2003) (overview of trademark dilution and related theories in Second Circuit)
- Hermes Int’l v. Lederer de Paris Fifth Ave., Inc., 219 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 2000) (standard for likelihood of confusion and trade dress protection)
- Centaur Comms., Ltd. v. A/S/M Commc’ns, Inc., 830 F.2d 1217 (2d Cir. 1987) (equitable considerations in trademark disputes)