Well, yesterday it was Kohler’s new intelligent toilet, and today it’s a pocketbook that’s supposed to look like poop. (I say supposed because, while poop as Mr. Hankey Poo, as emojis, and now as pocketbooks is coiled, I do believe that coiled poop is more likely to be canine than human. On the other hand, coiled poop is cuter…) Anyway, I guess it’s scat week at Pink Slip.
Today’s voyage into the wonderful world o
At the heart of the matter is MGA’s “Poopsie Pooey Puitton”.
MGA is preemptively suing Louis Vuitton’s parent company, luxury stable LVMH, to ensure it can keep making “Poopsie Pooey Puitton,” its slime-filled plastic purse. According to documents filed last week in Los Angeles federal court, Louis Vuitton has claimed the toy’s design is a trademark infringement because its design marks and name are similar to those of Louis Vuitton handbags. MGA argues not only is the toy obviously not a Louis Vuitton knockoff, but it was meant to slime the lifestyle of the ultrawealthy consumers who ascribe to the brand and thus should be protected as parody.
“Louis Vuitton and the LV Marks are associated with expensive, high-end, luxury products that evoke wealth and celebrity,” MGA’s counsel said in the complaint. “The use of the Pooey name and product in association with a product line of ‘magical unicorn poop’ is intended to criticize or comment upon the rich and famous, and the Louis Vuitton name, the LV marks, and on their conspicuous consumption.” (Source: Washington Post)
Well, making fun of conspicuous consumers in general, and celebrities in particular, never goes out of style. But ‘magical unicorn poop’ is something of an “it” toy, one of last year’s biggest success for MGA. So MGA, of course, decided to combine these two high concepts. MGA, by the way, has a long history of extremely tasteful toys. Remember the Bratz dolls????
Louis Vuitton takes guarding its trademarkspretty seriously. Wouldn’t want folks trading on its classic shit-brown, plastic-looking leather, tacky logo look and feel. Seriously, I have never understood the allure of Louis Vuitton, other than demonstrating that you’re willing to pay a lot of money for an ugly bag. (Or, in the case of 
But I don’t see what Louis Vuitton’s problem is. Seriously, is anyone going to mistake Louis Vuitton for Pooey Puitton? So why push the trademark button and play right into MGA’s hands. They get attention paid to their product, and Louis V comes off looking like a bully with no sense of humor.
In the past, Vuitton has failed to stop other companies from using their image and/or making fun of them.
They went after “a small Los Angeles handbag company that printed high-end handbag designs on canvas tote bags.” And they also sued a pet toy company that produced “Chewy Vuitton” chew toys that resembled LV purses. In both cases, LV lost.
"The furry little ‘Chewy Vuiton’ imitation, as something to be chewed by a dog, pokes fun at the elegance and expensiveness of a Louis Vuitton handbag, which must not be chewed by a dog,” Judge Paul V. Niemeyer wrote in his decision against LVMH.
(The MH stands for Moët Hennessy, in case you’re wondering.)
Personally, I don’t think the Pooey Puitton is all that clever a parody, or all that 
So it is perhaps the case that LVMH, a French company, just doesn’t see much to laugh about when it comes to merde. Although the country that gave us Marcel Marceau, and that worshipped at the altar of M. Jerry Lewis, may not have all that much of a sense of humor about anything…
Anyway, pushing the trademark thang against MGA – which looks likely to resolve in their favor – seems a bit heavy-handed. Not to mention that it plays right into MGA’s magical unicorn poop covered hands.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile, having searched on poop emojis, etc., I can’t wait to see what ads are going to be popping up over the next couple of days…
No comments:
Post a Comment