Having trouble reading this newsletter? Click here to see it in your browser.
You are receiving this newsletter because you signed up from our web site. Click here to unsubscribe.
Fashion & Apparel Law Blog - Legal Issues Facing the Fashion, Apparel and Textile Industry

Visit us online at the Sheppard Mullin web site or our Fashion & Apparel Law Blog


Subscribe spacerRSS icon

Add the Fashion & Apparel Law Blog to your feeds or subscribe by email MORE...


Pass it on

Know anyone who might be interested in our newsletter? Click here to forward this to up to 5 friends at once.



The Sheppard Mullin Fashion and Apparel Law Blog has been updated with the following article:

Louis Vuitton Sets A New Standard In Federal Trademark And Copyright Law

In the recent landmark case of Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. Akanoc Solutions, Inc., 658 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 2011), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a web-hosting company that owned and operated servers was liable for contributory copyright and trademark infringement when it failed to take steps to curtail alleged infringement committed by Chinese websites that used its servers. Louis Vuitton sued Akanoc Solutions, Inc. (“Akanoc”), Managed Solutions Group, Inc. (“MSG”), and Steven Chen (the owner of both companies) for contributory copyright and trademark infringement under the Copyright and Lanham Acts, respectively. MSG leased servers, bandwidth, and IP addresses to other companies, such as Akanoc, who then operated the servers and otherwise ran the business. Louis Vuitton alleged that some of Akanoc’s China-based customers directly infringed on Louis Vuitton’s trademarks and copyrights. Louis Vuitton sent the defendants eighteen Notices of Infringement documenting the infringements occurring on websites hosted by defendants, yet the defendants were unable to identify any action taken in response to the notices sent by Louis Vuitton and the websites continued to operate. Louis Vuitton alleged that defendants had actual knowledge of the website's activities, that defendants knowingly avoided learning of the full extent of infringing activities, and that defendants knowingly enabled the infringing conduct by hosting the websites and permitting them to display the counterfeit products.

Click here to read more.




This email was sent to [email address suppressed]
Click here to instantly unsubscribe.

Robert A. Darwell (310) 228-3740

Attorney Advertising
Copyright © 2012 Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
333 South Hope Street, 43rd Floor | Los Angeles, CA 90071
Design, Marketing and Support by LexBlog