[E-trademarks] VETEMENTS case going up to SCOTUS

Thu Sep 11 18:55:27 UTC 2025

I studied French for about ten years and I don’t remember the word VEUVE either (nor do I like champagne, but I guess that’s beside the point).

Jessica R. Friedman
Attorney at Law
300 East 59 Street, Ste. 2406
New York, NY 10022
Phone: 212-220-0900
Cell: 917-647-1884
E-mail: jrfriedman at litproplaw.com<mailto:jrfriedman at litproplaw.com>
URL: www.literarypropertylaw.com<http://www.literarypropertylaw.com>

[1479430908386_PastedImage]

From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Diane Gardner via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Date: Thursday, September 11, 2025 at 2:45 PM
To: For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Diane Gardner <diane at mmip.com>
Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] VETEMENTS case going up to SCOTUS
Just weighing in a bit:

I do not speak French fluently, but I studied French for 6 years and once knew it well enough to tutor the subject.  I don’t recall “veuve” being a word in my immediate French vocabulary.

On the other hand, the actual spelling of the French term for clothing is “vêtements.”  If any of you cannot see the special character present in this post, there is a circumflex (hat) accent over the first “e.”  For those who are at least minimally familiar with the French language, you will know that the circumflex often appears in words in which the “s” that would normally follow the vowel in related Romance language words is not present.  Vêtements (with or without the accent present) = vestments in my mind. Same as hôpital = hospital, île = isle, pâte = paste, côte = coast,  forêt = forest, etc.

Kind regards,

Diane L. Gardner
Reg. No. 36,518
_____________________________________________________________
Please note our new corporate address as of February 1, 2023:
Mastermind IP Law P.C., 440 N. Barranca Ave. #6387, Covina, CA 91723
760.294.5160 tel. 706.955.9666 tel. 803.226.0741 tel.  ▪  diane at mmip.com<mailto:diane at mmip.com>  e-mail
CA Lic. No. 196214   DC Lic. No. 470855   USPTO Reg. No. 36518

Please note our expedited mail processing address as of February 1, 2023:
Mastermind IP Law P.C., 532 Forest Bluffs Rd., Aiken, SC 29803
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This communication is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521.  It is sent by a law firm for its intended recipient only, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this communication to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone (706) 955-9666 or e-mail reply, delete it from your system, and destroy any hard copy you may have printed.  Absent an executed engagement agreement with Mastermind IP Law P.C., this message does not constitute legal advice, and it does not establish any previously non-existent professional relationship with, or representation of the recipient. Thank you.

From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Ramon G. Vela Cordova via E-trademarks
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2025 2:05 PM
To: For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Ramon G. Vela Cordova <rvela at velacordova.com>
Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] VETEMENTS case going up to SCOTUS

I don’t speak French, but at least here in Puerto Rico, “la Viuda” is a very common name for Veuve Clicquot champagne.  As in, “what should we order, la Viuda?”  Presumably, this is because at least some people understand that “veuve” means “viuda” in Spanish.  Also, to me at least, the mental connection between “vetements” in French and “vestimenta” in Spanish is no more obvious than the connection between “veuve” in French and “viuda” in Spanish.

Best regards,
Ramón

On Sep 10, 2025, at 2:38 PM, Welch, John L. via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:

The CAFC said this:

“[T]he word in question [VETEMENTS] is a simple and common word—the word for clothing. On the other hand, “widow” requires a more advanced vocabulary. This, therefore, distinguishes this case from the aspect of Palm Bay that was premised on “an appreciable number of purchasers [being] unlikely to be aware that VEUVE means ‘widow’” in French, and therefore “unlikely to translate the marks into English.”Palm Bay, 396 F.3d at 1377 (emphasis omitted) (citation omitted).”

Do we have any French speakers out there? Is “veuve” an obscure word?

PS: Palm Bay was a likelihood of confusion case [not a genericness (or descriptiveness) case] in which the mark VEUVE ROYALE was found to be confusingly similar to VEUVE CLIQUOT for wine, but THE WIDOW was not confusingly similar, since consumers would not translate VEUVE as WIDOW..

JLW

<image002.png>
John L. Welch
Senior Counsel
Admitted to Practice: Massachusetts, New York, and Washington, DC
jwelch at WolfGreenfield.com<mailto:jwelch at WolfGreenfield.com>
TEL. 617.646.8285
<image003.jpg><http://thettablog.blogspot.com/>
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
BOSTON | NEW YORK | WASHINGTON DC

wolfgreenfield.com<https://www.wolfgreenfield.com/>  <image004.png><https://www.linkedin.com/company/wolf-greenfield/> <image005.png><https://twitter.com/wolfgreenfield>
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me immediately by replying to this message and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you.

From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> On Behalf Of Jessica R. Friedman via E-trademarks
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2025 11:18 AM
To: For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Cc: Jessica R. Friedman <jrfriedman at litproplaw.com<mailto:jrfriedman at litproplaw.com>>
Subject: [E-trademarks] VETEMENTS case going up to SCOTUS

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/04/world/europe/vetements-trademark-lawsuit.html raises a few questions for me:

  1.  The NY Times reporter analogizes the registration of VEUVE CLIQUOT, which means “widow cliquot” and refers to the company matriarch, for champagne, to the registration of VETEMENTS, which in French means clothing, for clothing. Is that an analogy the applicant has actually made, or is this just the usual ignorance of NY Times articles when it comes to IP?

  1.  The PTO refused registration on the ground that the mark is merely descriptive and that it appears to be generic. How can it be both?

  1.  The applicant’s response to the OA included the argument that “vetements” referred only to clothing as a category, while they are applying to register specific items of clothing: “Although the word “clothing” may have a relationship to an overall category of products, it is not the descriptive (nor generic) term for any specific item. A purchaser would not say they want to “buy a clothing.” Further, when the mark VETEMENTS is encountered an observer would first have to undertake translation of the word, and then draw a relationship to a specific item such as a sweatshirt”.I understand that we have to try any and every credible argument, but that one doesn’t strike me as falling into that category.

Jessica R. Friedman
Attorney at Law
300 East 59 Street, Ste. 2406
New York, NY 10022
Phone: 212-220-0900
Cell: 917-647-1884
E-mail: jrfriedman at litproplaw.com<mailto:jrfriedman at litproplaw.com>
URL: www.literarypropertylaw.com<http://www.literarypropertylaw.com/>

<image006.png>

--
E-trademarks mailing list
E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com

Best regards,
RGVC

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This is a confidential and privileged communication between the sender and the intended recipient(s).  Access to this communication by anyone else is unauthorized.  It is prohibited and unlawful for any unintended recipient to disclose, copy, distribute, or use in any other way the contents of this communication or any attachment thereto.  If you have received this communication in error, please delete it immediately and notify the sender at (787) 594-0481.  Thank you.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250911/9ecc3d65/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001[92].png
Type: image/png
Size: 8892 bytes
Desc: image001[92].png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250911/9ecc3d65/attachment.png>