[E-trademarks] VETEMENTS case going up to SCOTUS
Matt Schneller
matt at tmtko.com
Fri Sep 12 15:48:19 UTC 2025
Agree with Pam.
And, while it's not *quite *a cognate due to the Norman misplacement of a
consonant (who can fuss with spelling amidst all that pillaging?), the
English "vestments" just means, more or less, "clothes (for priests)." That
seems relevant to how generally understood the word would be, too.
Matt Schneller
Partner
TM TKO, LLC
206-679-1895
On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 10:44 AM Pamela Chestek via E-trademarks <
e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
> But I expect those who took nothing more than first year French see
> "vetements" and immediately know it means "clothing." Highly descriptive or
> generic IMO, since a significant part of the population has passing
> famiilarity with French.
>
> Pam Chestek
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2025, 9:57 PM Jessica R. Friedman via E-trademarks <
> e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/300+East+59+Street,+Ste.+2406+%0D%0A+New+York,+NY+10022?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> 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
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/300+East+59+Street,+Ste.+2406+%0D%0A+New+York,+NY+10022?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> New York, NY 10022
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/300+East+59+Street,+Ste.+2406+%0D%0A+New+York,+NY+10022?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> Phone: 212-220-0900
>>
>> Cell: 917-647-1884
>>
>> E-mail: *jrfriedman at litproplaw.com <jrfriedman at litproplaw.com>*
>>
>> URL: *www.literarypropertylaw.com <http://www.literarypropertylaw.com>*
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: 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
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/440+N.+Barranca+Ave.+%236387,+Covina,+CA+91723?entry=gmail&source=g>
>> 760.294.5160 *tel*. 706.955.9666* tel. *803.226.0741 *tel*.* ▪ *
>> 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
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/532+Forest+Bluffs+Rd.,+Aiken,+SC+29803?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>
>> *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> 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
>>
>> 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> *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>
>> *Cc:* Jessica R. Friedman <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?
>>
>>
>>
>> 2. 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?
>>
>>
>>
>> 3. 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/300+East+59+Street,+Ste.+2406+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+New+York,+NY+10022?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> Jessica R. Friedman
>>
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/300+East+59+Street,+Ste.+2406+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+New+York,+NY+10022?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/300+East+59+Street,+Ste.+2406+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+New+York,+NY+10022?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> Attorney at Law
>>
>> 300 East 59 Street, Ste. 2406
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/300+East+59+Street,+Ste.+2406+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+New+York,+NY+10022?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> New York, NY 10022
>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/300+East+59+Street,+Ste.+2406+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+New+York,+NY+10022?entry=gmail&source=g>
>>
>> Phone: 212-220-0900
>>
>> Cell: 917-647-1884
>>
>> E-mail: *jrfriedman at litproplaw.com <jrfriedman at litproplaw.com>*
>>
>> URL: *www.literarypropertylaw.com <http://www.literarypropertylaw.com/>*
>>
>>
>>
>> <image006.png>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-trademarks mailing list
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-trademarks mailing list
>> E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
>> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
>>
> --
> E-trademarks mailing list
> E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250912/541a6897/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001[92].png
Type: image/png
Size: 8892 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250912/541a6897/attachment.png>
More information about the E-trademarks
mailing list