The new lawsuit, filed last week in the U. The new lawsuit, however, goes beyond those two cases and alleges Urban Outfitters is violating its agreement to not make products from Harley clothing. Its trademarks cover goods such as sunglasses, sweaters, motorcycles and clothing. As of Tuesday, according to Harley-Davidson has agreed to end ongoing litigation against Urban Outfitters, Inc. First, some of the Infringing Bodysuits are made from genuine Harley-Davidson products that Defendants have altered and reconstructed into new products that bear the Harley-Davidson trademarks. There's no short supply of mega-brands who have faced — or are currently facing — copyright and trademark infringement litigation.
A similar pattern repeated itself with another shirt that used the bar and shield logo in November 2014. Urban Outfitters is no stranger to copyright lawsuits. After being sued by Harley-Davidson in 2014 for trademark infringement, Urban Outfitters is on the receiving end of yet another trademark matter initiated by the famed motorcycle manufacturer. . The two sides settled the lawsuit in May 2014. This suit covered more than just t-shirts Free People manufactured.
The bodysuits were created by cutting off the sleeves, cutting the neckline and cutting and sewing the bottom of the shirt together to create a new product. We use data about you for a number of purposes explained in the links below. Will Urban Outfitters learn from past mistakes? At least when it comes to trademark infringement. It seems some people never learn. First, some of the Infringing Bodysuits are made from genuine Harley-Davidson products that Defendants have altered and reconstructed into new products that bear the Harley-Davidson trademarks.
It and The current lawsuit seeks an order blocking Urban Outfitters from using any Harley trademarks or logos, altering Harley clothing or adding its own branding to Harley clothing. By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of data and cookies. The company sued Urban Outfitters for trademark infringement in March 2014. The latest case of dueling brands comes from Harley-Davidson and Urban Outfitters. This settlement comes on the heels of facing the clothing corp: In March, Goldenvoice, the company behind the Coachella music festival, filed litigation alleging trademark infringement by another Free People line due to the use of the festival's name on merchandise. We use data about you for a number of purposes explained in the links below. This is the third lawsuit Harley has filed in the last year against a company for infringing on its trademarks.
Harley-Davidson, Urban Outfitters, trademark, counterfeiting, clothing, Lanham Act, unfair competition, trademark dilution, fashion,. By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of data and cookies. Harley says it reached out to Urban Outfitters and the company agreed to stop selling the shirt. The motorcycle manufacturer also asked for a permanent injunction against the retailer. Before that, in 2012, Navajo Nation also Urban for trademark infringement. According to the paperwork, which was filed in the U. Milwaukee-based Harley first sued Urban Outfitters in 2014.
If is any indicator: no way, no how. Apparently, the company was also reconstructing official Hrley t-shirts into other articles of clothing. Harley-Davidson alleges these bodysuits violate a 2014 settlement agreement with Urban Outfitters. This action is also blocked in the settlement reached by the two companies. This product is no longer available. Harley claims it discovered at least three different bodysuits that have Harley trademarks on them, but adds there may be more it is not aware of. In addition, Harley-Davidson argued that the clothing company had diluted its trademarks and was in breach of a contract between the companies.
The motorcycle manufacturer said that Urban Outfitters had infringed its trademarks, violated section 32 1 of the Lanham Act for trademark counterfeiting, unfairly competed and falsely designated origin. Whether it be or , the ownership of design continues to be a hot-button debate, often escalating to lawsuits and in some cases settlements. . . . .