Niigata Set to Approve Restart of Japan’s Largest Nuclear Power Plant in Major Energy Shift 
Elon Musk Wins Reinstatement of Historic Tesla Pay Package After Delaware Supreme Court Ruling 
JPMorgan’s Top Large-Cap Pharma Stocks to Watch in 2026 
Roche CEO Warns US Drug Price Deals Could Raise Costs of New Medicines in Switzerland 
Dina Powell McCormick Resigns From Meta Board After Eight Months, May Take Advisory Role 
FDA Fast-Tracks Approval of Altria’s on! PLUS Nicotine Pouches Under New Pilot Program 
Saks Global Weighs Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Amid Debt Pressures and Luxury Retail Slowdown 
Italy Fines Apple €98.6 Million Over App Store Dominance 
FedEx Beats Q2 Earnings Expectations, Raises Full-Year Outlook Despite Stock Dip 
Boeing Seeks FAA Emissions Waiver to Continue 777F Freighter Sales Amid Strong Cargo Demand 
Moore Threads Unveils New GPUs, Fuels Optimism Around China’s AI Chip Ambitions 
Trump Administration Reviews Nvidia H200 Chip Sales to China, Marking Major Shift in U.S. AI Export Policy 
Maersk Vessel Successfully Transits Red Sea After Nearly Two Years Amid Ongoing Security Concerns 
Novo Nordisk Stock Surges After FDA Approves Wegovy Pill for Weight Loss 
John Carreyrou Sues Major AI Firms Over Alleged Copyrighted Book Use in AI Training 
Volaris and Viva Agree to Merge, Creating Mexico’s Largest Low-Cost Airline Group 
Bridgewater Associates Plans Major Employee Ownership Expansion in Milestone Year 
Coach initiated legal action against Gap on Wednesday, alleging that the latter's Old Navy unit unlawfully sold T-shirts featuring the trademarked term "Coach." The luxury handbag manufacturer and its parent company, Tapestry, asserted that Gap had no authorization to market these T-shirts, leading to potential customer confusion.
Claims of Irreparable Harm by Coach
The Inquirer reported that the lawsuit in a Los Angeles federal court for trademark infringement highlighted the irreparable harm caused by Gap's unauthorized T-shirt sales. Coach emphasized that its trademarks epitomize a blend of fashion, craftsmanship, and luxury lifestyle items, distinct from the T-shirts in question. The legal dispute underscores Coach's commitment to protecting its brand identity, which was established in 1941.
Legal Actions and Damages Sought
According to Reuters, Coach, headquartered in New York, seeks unspecified damages from Gap in response to the Alleged Trademark Infringement. The legal claims encompass counterfeiting, violations of California's unfair competition law, and removing infringing inventory. Gap, headquartered in San Francisco, refrained from commenting on the ongoing litigation, a common practice for companies involved in legal disputes.
This legal confrontation exemplifies the efforts of luxury brands to combat the sale of counterfeit products, underscoring the significance of protecting intellectual property rights in the fashion industry.
Precedents in Fashion Law
This legal tangle between Coach and Gap is not an isolated incident in the fashion industry. Luxury brands have often gone to court to defend their trademarks and brand identities.
One notable example is the dispute between Gucci and Forever 21, where Gucci accused the retailer of copying its trademarked stripe design. These cases highlight the delicate balance brands must maintain between inspiring market trends and protecting their intellectual property.
They also showcase the critical role of legal frameworks in maintaining the integrity and exclusivity of luxury brand trademarks in a highly competitive market.
Photo: Simon Champagne/Unsplash
