Plagiarism cases of businesses operating in different sectors

This case occurred between fashion business and food beverage service, in 2016 the French company Louis Vuitton filed a lawsuit against the South Korean fast food restaurant Louis Vuiton Dak for allegedly copying the fashion brand's logo

Kim, the owner of Louis Vuiton Dak, claimed that "Dak" in his brand name derives from the Korean word "tongdak," meaning "whole chicken," and argued that it did not imitate the Louis Vuitton brand. However, evidence revealed that Kim's infringement extended beyond just imitating the trademark name; it also included plagiarizing the logo, design, and product packaging of Louis Vuiton Dak, which was very similar to that of Louis Vuitton. 

Advantages of Registering Trademark

By officially registering a trademark, a company can benefit from enhanced legal protection and improved enforcement mechanisms. In the event of intellectual property theft, brands can seek legal recourse and hold plagiarists accountable by imposing fines in accordance with the law. 

In this case, even though the two companies operate in different sectors, the court ruled in favor of Louis Vuitton, and determined that Louis Vuiton Dak had infringed the trademark. As a result, the judge ordered Kim to pay a fine of 1,250 KRW for trademark infringement.

Kim then changed the name of his restaurant to "chaLouisvui Tondak," which was considered a violation of the previous ruling. As a result, the court ordered Kim to pay a fine of 12,750 KRW per day to Louis Vuitton for 29 days, totaling approximately 14.5 million KRW.

What can we conclude from this case?

Although the businesses are in different sectors, creating a trademark requires good faith. The use of a famous trademark by Louis Vuiton Dak for its brand name is unethical and is reasonably presumed to have been done in bad faith. Bad Faith is not welcome anywhere, including in the Indonesian Trademark spectrum, as well as the other IP aspects.

Therefore, the court considered this action not negligent but clearly intentional. If such actions are allowed to continue, other violators may follow suit, harming the original trademark owners. In Indonesia, Louis Vuiton Dak's actions would violate Article 21 Paragraph 3 of Law 20/2016, and its trademark application would be rejected.

This kind of case marks the need for business practitioners to consult their legal needs to IP Lawyers and IP Consultant in their respective countries. In Indonesia, there are registered IP consultants and Law Offices who specialize in Intellectual Property. You must not undervalue the importance of having a good and professional IP Lawyer in Indonesia.

Source:
https://www.labbrand.com/insights/article/brand-naming-in-asia-ip-lessons-from-lv-dak.html 

https://ww.fashionnetwork.com/news/-louis-vuitton-fried-chicken-owner-fined-in-s-korea,683615.html#ashi-studio 

https://www.tramatm.com/blog/category/fashion/louis-vuitton-v-louis-vuitton-dak 

http://iprstudio.com/trademark-infringement-case-study-2/ 

https://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_business/740549