Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group
Richard Branson is one of the world's most intriguing, successful and enduring billionaires. Worth $4.2 billion as of FORBES' last count in March, Branson is, of course, the founder of the Virgin Group, which consists of more than 400 companies worldwide, almost all of which bearing the word 'virgin' in its names.
With sales of more than $21 billion last year, the Virgin Group is a global powerhouse, and one of those brands that seem to have been around forever, even achieving a cool status in the way Apple has. That's why it came as a surprise that Branson decided to send a cease-and-desist letter to I Am Not A Virgin, a small New York eco-friendly denim label, claiming that the company's name infringes on his copyright, as the Telegraph's Laura Hubbert reported on the case.
I Am Not A Virgin makes jeans and T-shirts from a blend of virgin cotton and a variety of recycled materials including plastic bottles, food packaging and discarded X-Ray film. The New York-based brand was founded by Peter Heron over three years ago and he is keen to state that he has held the trademark for the same amount of time.
"What the lawyers are saying," Heron explains, "is if a consumer walks past a store window and sees I Am Not A Virgin jeans, they wouldn't be able to decipher between I Am Not A Virgin and Virgin. We don't believe this to be true." Perhaps he has a point there, but Virgin "respectfully maintains its position that confusion and dilution are likely."
Branson's lawyers were however kind enough to suggest some alternative names for the label:
"Have you thought about I Am Not Chaste or I Am Not Pure?" they asked. Heron has other ideas, "I guess I could rename my jeans Not Made By Richard Branson." If that's the best he can come up with, we can see why he is so reluctant to re-brand.
It's no news that big brands such as Virgin have always been protective of their names and products. French fashion house Louis Vuitton recently sued three Canadian counterfeiters and asked them to cough up millions of dollars in damages for peddling phoney goods. In a similar case, Hermès came out in top last May in a major trademark infringement suit that netted the firm a hefty $100 million in damages.
In both situations, however, the selling of replicas and counterfeit versions of fashion accessories were in question. That doesn't seem to be the case for Heron and his brand, which produces goods that are not a part of Virgin's portfolio. Besides, common sense says that the word 'virgin' cannot be owned by one individual or organisation.
The fashion world was abuzz earlier this year when Christian Louboution took his case against Yves Saint Laurent to the federal appellate court, claiming that the use of red soles of its shoes distinguish the brand, and the use of red soles by other designers such as YSL would confuse consumers as to the source of the shoe and detract from his brand value.
Beanstalk's chief legal officer, Oliver Herzfeld, disagrees, as he told FORBES in January.
“Whatever commercial purposes may support extending trademark protection to a single color for industrial goods do not easily fit the unique characteristics and needs—the creativity, aesthetics, taste, and seasonal change—that define production of articles of fashion. . . In the fashion industry, the Lanham Act has been upheld to permit the registration of the use of color in a trademark, but only in distinct patterns or combinations of shades that manifest a conscious effort to design a uniquely identifiable mark embedded in the goods,” Herzfeld explained.
In other words, it's stupid to claim a colour of your own, let say a word. Branson, who's also well known for his support of environmental causes, apparently has failed to see that.
Heron, the founder of I Am Not A Virgin, shot a video explaining the conundrum. Check it out here.
