Or at least that’s what people are saying about Chanel. Circa 2010 they published a letter protecting their brand in a full page ad in WWD. Looks like they are fishing for trademark infringement again. My September 25th issue of Women’s Wear Daily arrived donning that same letter, glaring loudly from the back cover of the publication…
“A NOTE OF INFORMATION AND ENTREATY TO FASHION EDITORS, ADVERTISERS, COPYWRITERS AND OTHER WELL-INTENTIONED MIS-USERS OF OUR CHANEL NAME.
CHANEL WAS A DESIGNER, AN EXTRAORDINARY WOMAN WHO MADE A TIMELESS CONTRIBUTION TO FASHION.
CHANEL IS A PERFUME.
CHANEL IS MODERN ELEGANCE IN COUTURE, READY-TO-WEAR, ACCESSORIES, WATCHES AND FINE JEWELRY.
CHANEL IS OUR REGISTERED TRADEMARK FOR FRAGRANCE, COSMETICS, CLOTHING, ACCESSORIES AND OTHER LOVELY THINGS.
ALTHOUGH OUR STYLE IS JUSTLY FAMOUS, A JACKET IS NOT ‘A CHANEL JACKET’ UNLESS IT IS OURS, AND SOMEBODY ELSE’S CARDIGANS ARE NOT ‘CHANEL FOR NOW.’
AND EVEN IF WE ARE FLATTERED BY SUCH TRIBUTES TO OUR FAME AS ‘CHANEL-ISSIME, CHANEL-ED, CHANELS AND CHANEL-IZED,’ PLEASE DON’T. OUR LAWYERS POSITIVELY DETEST THEM.
WE TAKE OUR TRADEMARK SERIOUSLY.
So what does this mean? Simply put–Chanel is not an adjective–yes, that is trademark infringement. The curious part of me wants to know how many times a year Chanel publishes this letter to the fashion world, the other part of me wonders if anyone is even listening. If Chanel doesn’t make these sorts of public displays, then they may not have ground to stand on against any sort of trademark lawsuit. Airing these public letters proves they are doing the best to protect their brand.
In honor of Chanel’s prestigious trademark, I rounded a up a few of my favorite Chanel pieces currently available at some of my favorite haunts:
*All editorial images copyright Chanel unless otherwise noted