Fashion is, in essence, based on inspiration. Ask the great designers and you will be surprised to know the origin of their most beautiful pieces. Christian Dior, for example, took a lot of inspiration… from his dog Bobby! Not a collection without a suit bearing the name of its faithful companion. This is also why the artistic director of the House, Maria Grazia Chiuri, named one of the bags she created for the brand, the “Dior Bobby Bag”.
But what happens when fashion houses take inspiration from each other? Today, it is not uncommon to see a model that works, available under all brands. Zara is very often accused of imitation, but it now faces competition from Chinese giants Shein, Ali Express and Temu, the new kid on the block.
Thus, in 2020, Zara was, for example, condemned for having marketed two imitations of models from the RAINS brand, the Long Jacket and the Parka Coat[1]. Shein, for its part, does not hesitate to offer copies of Zara models, as shown in TikTok videos comparing the models of the two brands using the hashtag #zaradupe (Zara imitation). These videos have accumulated nearly 39.9 million views.
It is therefore a new consumption model that is developing. In a study conducted by Business Insider in 2023, more than 70% of respondents from Generation Z declared that they sometimes, or very regularly, buy imitations[2].
It is in this context that Chanel decided to attack Jonak, believing that the latter had imitated some of its identity codes in several shoe models. Among these codes, we find the emblematic “sling-back” model imagined in 1957 by Gabrielle Chanel herself. These two-tone strappy shoes are, according to the House of Chanel, the symbol of elegance and the liberation of women. For Gabrielle Chanel, these shoes are “ the last point of elegance ”. This model, which quickly became a classic, was also worn by Brigitte Bardot, Catherine Deneuve, Jane Fonda and even Romy Schneider.
The famous Maison also accused Jonak of using its interwoven chain in some of its models. We no longer present the Chanel chain model that we find on many iconic bags or even on its suits.
So, could the French shoemaker Jonak have been a little too inspired by this heritage when he marketed his shoes? Dhapou, Dhapop and Ivana ? This is the question that the Paris Court of Appeal had to answer on October 16 (CA Paris October 16, 2024 n°22-19513).
Indeed, Jonak has marketed two-tone shoes with the beige color and black toe as well as shoes with the interwoven chain. Is this a simple inspiration on the part of the French shoemaker or is this reprehensible?
At first instance, the Paris Commercial Court only condemned the model with the interwoven chain (TC Paris 15ᵉ ch., October 17, 2022, RG 2021005707), which is why Chanel appealed.
The basis of Chanel’s request was not based on intellectual property rights, but on parasitism. Parasitism is an act of unfair competition which consists, for a competitor, of interfering in the wake of another in order to benefit from its efforts, its investments, its know-how and/or its notoriety. The notion of parasitism is based on article 1240 of the Civil Code and has been developed by case law (Court of Cassation, Commercial Chamber, May 6, 1991, 89-16048; Cass. com., February 16 2022, n° 20-13542). Thus, parasitism makes it possible in particular to protect elements not covered by intellectual property rights and appears as an alternative to counterfeiting action.
As the Paris Court of Appeal recalls in its decision, it was therefore appropriate for Chanel to provide proof of “ the existence of an individualized economic value resulting from know-how, intellectual work, notoriety and investments, the inspiration or evocation of this economic value providing a competitive advantage to the author of the parasitic acts, and an inspiration or intentional evocation that is unjustified and for profit ».
To demonstrate this, the luxury House provides numerous elements such as surveys, certifications of its marketing and advertising expenses by its auditor, press reviews, proof of the exhibition of these shoes in films, museums, etc.
Thus, if the Court of Appeal specifies that “ the combination of these two colors (beige and black), moreover classic for shoes, cannot be appropriated in itself ”, Chanel was able to demonstrate the individualized economic value and thus oppose the marketing of certain models by Jonak.
The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the Maison de rue Cambon and ordered Jonak to pay 150,000 euros for economic damage and 30,000 euros for moral damage. She also ordered him to stop selling the models concerned in this color combination and to withdraw them from the market, within one month, at the risk of being fined €1,000 per day of delay.
This case demonstrates that there are many ways to protect your creations.
The LEGALPROTECH-AVOCATS firm supports you in setting up this protection and offers you tailor-made advice in order to promote all of your assets, whether they can be protected by intellectual property or not.
By Kelly PHAETON
Article published on November 5, 2024. Its content reflects the context of its publication.
A question about your situation? Contact the firm ↗