Style

Style

Navajo Nation Formally Sues Urban Outfitters For Tribal Print Panties

Just a few months after sending Urban Outfitters a letter asking that it stop selling all of its Navajo-branded products, the Navajo Nation has sued the retailer for infringing its trademark — and its sole right to make and market products under its tribal name.

RELATED: Uh Oh: Urban Outfitters’ ‘Navajo Hipster Panties’ Are Actually Illegal

Urban Outfitters responded to the letter, which the nation sent last October after Urban started selling tribal print underwear named Navajo Hipster Panties (among other things), by keeping the products on its website and in stores, but removing the word Navajo from all of the items’ product descriptions. But The Associated Press reports that changing the name of the products didn’t satisfy the Navajo Nation’s claims on its copyright, and its lawyers believe they can convince a judge to bar Urban Outfitters from ever using its name again. The suit also seeks unspecified monetary damages.

And it looks like the Nation has a chance of winning both — after all, it has the law on its side. In addition to have roughly 10 registered trademarks of its name that cover everything from clothing to household products, it also can rely on The Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990, which makes it illegal to sell products claiming to be produced by the Navajo people when they’re actually made in a factory in Bahrain.

RELATED: Urban Outfitters Asked To Remove ‘Navajo’ Products From Stores Worldwide

Urban Outfitters may have only set out to make an homage to the Navajo and other American Indian tribes with its products, but it could end up paying for violating federal law. And New York-based fashion law specialists Susan Scafidi and Joseph Murphy, Jr., both agree that Urban could lose big time.

“That’s what disgusts me about this situation,” Murphy said. “I, like many people, thought it would have been resolved. But apparently Urban Outfitters declined to write the big apology and may have to write the big check.”

The Navajo Nation’s objections to traditionally styled beaded earrings or a hacienda bag that don’t carry the tribe’s name are much less likely to succeed, Scafidi said. But she said it shows a pattern that could influence a jury, which the tribe has requested in its lawsuit.

“Imagine all of those products piled on a table in the courtroom, looking like Santa Fe meets New York’s notorious Canal Street or Beijing’s Silk Market,” she wrote in an email.

And to think: None of this would have happened if Urban hadn’t started selling these insensitive products in the first place.

[MSNBC]

Chris Burch Booted From Ex-Wife Tory Burch’s Board

And the War of Burches heats up.

Though it doesn’t look like Tory Burch is taking legal action against ex-husband Chris Burch, she has forced him to step down as co-chair of her brand’s board. A source told the New York Post:

“Chris Burch is no longer co-chair of the board. Tory is the sole chair of the board, and this reflects how her company has been run since its inception. Chris never had an office or was involved in the day-to-day running of Tory Burch. While Chris remains a shareholder and a board member at Tory Burch, Barclays Capital remains engaged to sell his shares.”

The similarities between Tory’s Tory Burch and Chris’s C. Wonder have been a point of contention since Chris opened up his first C. Wonder store in November. Tory believes shoppers are confusing the brands, and has asked Chris to change his concept. It doesn’t look like he will be giving in on that front, however; he is planning to open another New York store later this year.

We attended the opening of C. Wonder back in the fall, and while it reminded us a bit of Tory Burch, it’s probably more aesthetically reminiscent of Kate Spade with a hint of J.Crew. However, the scale and pricing make it quite different than all of those brands, Tory Burch included. There are 86 product categories comprised of 1800 SKUs, with an average unit retail price of $40. Chris told us he planned to open 200 stores in two years, mostly in malls.

That said, the DNA of the brand isn’t terribly different from that of the brand he built with his ex-wife. And the situation, as detailed in Jessica Pressler‘s excellent New York Magazine piece, is complex. We sympathize with Tory, but we also understand Chris’s side — and so does Kelly Cutrone:

“I don’t really get it. Did they trademark lacquer? Does Lilly Pulitzer start calling Tory and saying, ‘Hey, you’re doing a modernized version of what I used to do, please stop’? Does Yves Saint Laurent call and say, ‘No, I’m the king of the tunic, I lived in Morocco’? Did the Knights of the Templars call off Christian Dior because he was using chain mail and that’s they what wore in the Crusades?”

Regardless, having Chris separate from Tory’s company probably makes the most sense for everybody.