Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supremes Will Decide if Victoria Can Keep Her Secret
NEWSMAX ^ | 4/16/02 | Limbacher

Posted on 04/16/2002 7:02:10 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

Victoria's Secret, the giant lingerie store known for its oft-ogled catalogue of voluptuous models in slinky eveningwear, is counting on the Supreme Court of the United States to protect its name against a mom and pop novelty sex shop in Kentucky.

The high court of the land has decided to hear the 4-year-old case of Victor's Little Secret vs. Victoria's Secret in the interest of clarifying trademark law.

The huge unmentionables retailer is attempting to prove that its tiny rival hurt the Victoria's Secret name by opening a store with a sound alike name.

Victor and Cathy Moseley contend that the store was first named "Victor's Secret" because Victor wanted to keep it secret from his old boss, according to the NY Post.

The decision will set a precedent for other cases where a competitor is "watering down a trademark" through the use of a similar name.

A federal appeals court in Cincinnati already ruled for Victoria's Secret, but the Supreme Court now has the ultimate authority over the 'Bra-haha'.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: victoriasecret

1 posted on 04/16/2002 7:02:10 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Huh...somehow I would think that the Supremes would have better things to argue over...maybe they are sequestering some of the models for long, behind-closed-doors "interview sessions"? (heh)
2 posted on 04/16/2002 7:18:28 AM PDT by WyldKard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Victoria's Secret: "She's" actually a man!
3 posted on 04/16/2002 7:29:11 AM PDT by Clemenza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WyldKard
I'm sure Judge Thomas would like that!
4 posted on 04/16/2002 7:30:09 AM PDT by Clemenza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I think we all need some visuals to completely evaluate the merits of this case. When the author cites "voluptuous models in slinky eveningwear", exactly what is he referring to?
5 posted on 04/16/2002 7:33:00 AM PDT by gridlock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson