Source: Hualizhi
Recently, the Seoul District Court of South Korea made a judgment on the lawsuit filed by French luxury giant Hermès (Hermès) against a Seoul studio Franc Atelier
. The studio mainly provides handicraft courses to teach customers how to imitate Hermès platinum bag and other luxury brands.
The court ruled that Franc Atelier's teaching behavior violated South Korea's Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act (hereinafter referred to as UCPA), and ordered the studio to immediately and permanently stop such unfair competition and pay compensation to Hermes.
In recent years, the teaching of this type of luxury handbag imitation course in South Korea has worried luxury brand owners. Without brand authorization, many small workshops or studios provide already tailored and easy-to-assemble materials, and then teach customers to assemble them with simple sewing techniques, allowing customers to get their dream "luxury handbags" at prices far lower than the authentic ones.
The reason why Franc Atelier Studio in this case was sued by Hermes was because it provided courses to imitate Hermes' iconic handbags (platinum bags and Kelly bags ) and sold DIY material bags to student customers first.
Seoul District Court ruled that the teaching behavior "can be regarded as equivalent to the direct use of Hermes' source identifier", that is, Hermes trademark (Hermes retains trademark rights for the appearance of its platinum bag and Kelly bag worldwide, because the decorative elements of these two handbags themselves can indicate the source like the brand name or logo), which violates the UCPA's regulations prohibiting the use of logos that are the same or similar to others' product names, trademarks or packaging, causing confusion between them. Although “teaching” is not explicitly mentioned in the UCPA clause, the court stressed that the studio is no longer simply teaching students general craftsmanship, but also provided students with materials in the same shape as Hermès logo handbags and specifically instructed students on how to make handbags using the materials provided.
In addition, the court also found that in the process of teaching students how to make counterfeit handbags, Franc Atelier was essentially involved in the illegal manufacturing and sale of counterfeit goods, and UCPA also prohibited such behavior.
Seoul District Court also gave a broad definition of the "teaching" behavior mentioned in this case, including: advertising and marketing of imitation handbag courses, responding to students' questions, students' choice of special courses, selling imitation DIY material packages in class, teaching students' courses, and allowing students to imitate handbags in class.
Hermes' breakthrough victory significantly broadened the scope of conduct that could be considered unfair competition in South Korea and also provided a precedent for all luxury companies to protect trademarks from abuse by such studio courses.
Previously, in July, Hermes just won a five-year lawsuit for handbag design rights protection in South Korea. South Korea's Supreme Court ruled that South Korean trendy handbag brand Playnomore did violate the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act, prohibiting the brand from reproduction of handbag styles that mimicked Hermès platinum bags and Kelly bags.
(Photo above: Playnomore imitates Hermes platinum bags and Kelly bags)
In June, the Paris prosecutor also cracked a case of a counterfeiting and selling counterfeit gang for former Hermes employees. The gang obtained crocodile leather raw materials from Italian suppliers, smuggled zippers and other parts from Hermes' factories, and hand-sewned by four skilled leather workers. Finally, the fake bags were sold at a price of 23,500 to 32,000 euros each, which could make a profit of about 2 million euros per year.
