Legal Analysis: Toymaker's Lawsuit Against Louis Vuitton - Case Study

This case study analyzes the legal dispute between Toymaker and Louis Vuitton, focusing on the right to create parody purses. Louis Vuitton, a luxury brand known for its monogram, is highly protective of its image due to the prevalence of counterfeiting. The case explores the legal definition of parody and its application in trademark infringement cases. The document references the case of Louis Vuitton v. MOB, where the court ruled in favor of MOB, emphasizing the importance of fair use and parody. The assignment addresses the question of whether Louis Vuitton should pursue legal action against companies parodying its products, considering the potential for fair use defenses and the impact on brand image. The analysis highlights the complexities of protecting a brand's image while allowing for artistic expression and commentary through parody.

Running head: TOYMAKER V. LOUIS VUITTON
TOYMAKER V. LOUIS VUITTON
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1TOYMAKER V. LOUIS VUITTON
1. Louis Vuitton or LV is one of the luxury retail companies in the world which is based
in Paris. It comes within the world's top 19 most valuable luxury brand. Louis Vuitton
is also one of the most counterfeited products. Its LV monogram is said to be one of
the most desirable and valuable brands. It has been seen that the signature Monogram
Canvas of the luxurious product was created to avert counterfeiting practice. Louis
Vuitton is protective of its image due to the identical fake products available in the
world market which often manipulates the customer worldwide who wanted to obtain
the original product from the brand but end up buying a false one. It is to be further
added that, the counterfeit products are so identical regarding the styles and designs,
which leads to hampering the image of the good quality and brand value which the
original product assures to their customer and further leads to losing potential
customer of the company.
2. Louis Vuitton before filing a legal suit against any other company alleging that they
have parodied their branded products must need to know the actual definition of
parody. In legal parlance, it is not permissible to use the product invented by another
person and which is protected under copyright law without the permission of the
inventor of such a product. On the other hand, parody means imitating the artistic
work of an artist or author the sole purpose of which is to ridicule or give a comic
effect to the act and it can be used as a fair defense to the copyright protection rule.
Therefore, Louis Vuitton must consider the factors of their defeat in previous cases
such as Louis Vuitton v. MOB. In the case of Vuitton v. MOB, the court rejects LV’s
plea of trademark infringement and dilution against MOB and held that LV has failed
to provide adequate evidence to prove trademark infringement by MOB in making
their regular tote bags by using various designs of LV. The court held that MOB will
successfully get the defense of fair use, as their product establishes the requirement of

2TOYMAKER V. LOUIS VUITTON
parody by making the design in such a way through which it is identifiable that MOB
tries to make fun of original LV products as well as the print on another side of the
bag reflects the bag to be MOB's and not of LV's. Therefore, it is clear that the MOB
did not intend to use LV’s mark to increase their sales but to mock the pricey affair
associated with LV (www.thefashionlaw.com). Therefore, Louis Vuitton must
consider their suit against Toymaker, as the Toymaker company defended that sole
purpose of their unicorn poop bag is not to copy LV's bags as Toymaker has pointed
out a wide list that why should not a customer confused pooey puitton with the
original Louis Vuitton bags (www.washingtonpost.com).

3TOYMAKER V. LOUIS VUITTON
Reference:
www.thefashionlaw.com. "Supreme Court Denies Louis Vuitton's Appeal Over "Parody"
Tote Bags | The Fashion Law". The Fashion Law, 2017. Online. Internet. 10 Apr.
2020. . Available: https://www.thefashionlaw.com/supreme-court-denies-louis-
vuittons-appeal-over-parody-tote-bags/.
www.washingtonpost.com, 2019. Online. Internet. 10 Apr. 2020. . Available:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/01/07/toymaker-sues-louis-vuitton-
right-keep-making-pooey-purses/?noredirect=on.