Court: "Reformed products are valuable goods"
Louis Vuitton 'Reform'... "15 million won compensation"
A court ruling has determined that 'reform products' made by repairing and remaking Louis Vuitton bags infringe on the luxury brand's trademark rights.
The 31st Special Civil Appeal Division of the Patent Court dismissed the appeal of reformer A on the 28th in a lawsuit filed by luxury brand company ‘Louis Vuitton Malletier’ against A for trademark infringement and injunction, according to Yonhap News Agency. A was found guilty of infringing Louis Vuitton's trademark rights in the first trial and was ordered to pay damages, and appealed the decision but lost.
The appellate court ruled that A must not manufacture reform products using the fabric of bags bearing the Louis Vuitton trademark and must pay Louis Vuitton damages of 15 million KRW. This is the same result as the first trial held last November.
Between 2017 and 2021, A received Louis Vuitton bags from customers and used the fabric to create bags and wallets of different sizes, shapes, and purposes, charging 100,000 to 700,000 KRW per reform product. Upon learning this, Louis Vuitton filed a lawsuit in February 2022, claiming that A infringed on its trademark rights by undermining the source indication and quality assurance functions of its trademark.
Throughout the trial, A argued that reform products do not constitute new goods. However, the court explained, "To apply trademark law violations, it must be examined whether reform products qualify as goods," and added, "Reform products are traded at high prices in the used goods market like original products and have value as independent goods, thus qualifying as goods."
The court further stated, "Since the plaintiff's trademark is displayed on the reform products and there are no indications such as 'reformed' or 'recycled product' on them, ordinary consumers may be misled to believe that the products originate from Louis Vuitton," concluding, "This constitutes trademark infringement."
The court also rejected A's claim that trademark rights cannot be asserted again because the reform products are within the identity of the original products. The court held, "Reform products are entirely new goods with different shapes, sizes, forms, and functions, and thus trademark rights can be asserted," ruling in favor of the plaintiff.
Immediately after the appellate court ruling, A expressed disappointment, stating, "This is an unreasonable judgment that ignores consumer rights." A also announced intentions to appeal to the Supreme Court, saying, "From now on, acts such as reforming clothes or bags and tuning cars have all become illegal."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
