Citizen Watches Australia
advertisement
Citizen Watches Australia
advertisement
Citizen Watches Australia
advertisement
Goto your account
Search Stories by: 
and/or
 

News

Articles from DIAMOND JEWELLERY (846 Articles), RINGS - ENGAGEMENT (217 Articles), RING MOUNTS (3 Articles)

Tiffany and Costco trademark dispute continues
Tiffany and Costco trademark dispute continues
 









Tiffany and Costco battle continues

The dispute around the use of “tiffany setting” is set to continue after a US federal court declared there was a “genuine factual dispute” over its use as a generic term.

Tiffany & Co’s attempts to dismiss a counterclaim from Costco that “tiffany setting” is a generic term has been thrown out by a US federal court.  

As reported previously by Jeweller, there have been ongoing legal battles between the giant warehouse chain and the iconic jeweller regarding the selling of Tiffany-labelled diamond rings in Costco stores around the world.

At the heart of the dispute is the use of the word “Tiffany” in Costco’s labelling and advertising. Tiffany & Co took legal action in February 2013 claiming Costco was falsely selling diamond rings branded as Tiffany.

Costco counterclaimed this action, stating it was not claiming to sell Tiffany & Co rings, but rather that the labelling referred to a “tiffany setting” which Costco claims is a generic industry term.

Lawyers for Tiffany & Co went back to court in April 2013 to have the counterclaim of “tiffany setting” being a generic term thrown out; however, a Southern District New York Court has ruled that the case can proceed.

US-based industry magazine JCK has reported that, in its defence, Costco brought forward Gem Certification & Assurance Lab president Donald Palmieri as a witness. Palmieri testified that in his experience and through his research, the use of “tiffany setting” as a description was widespread in the jewellery community.

Tiffany & Co claimed this was irrelevant, as Costco never used the word “setting” in its labelling or advertising. Furthermore, Tiffany & Co argued that the term could only refer to a “particular style of engagement ring that was designed by company founder Charles Lewis Tiffany”.

Although Judge Laura Taylor Swain did not validate Costco’s claim that “tiffany setting” is indeed a generic term, she did state that there was a “genuine factual dispute” over its use and so dismissed Tiffany & Co’s case.

While this may appear to open the door for more legal disputes, some media reports suggest that it is hoped it may actually expedite a settlement, as Tiffany & Co would not want to risk its iconic setting being legally classified as generic.

Background reading
Tiffany & Co sues supermarket chain
Tiffany vs Costco – round 3
Leaked email could affect Tiffany case










Nationwide Jewellers
advertisement





Your Say

No comments added yet...

You must be registered and logged in to leave comments. Sign Up!




Thursday, 09 April, 2020 04:28am
login to my account
Username: Password:
Rapid Casting
advertisement
Duraflex Group Australia
advertisement
Sekonda
advertisement
© 2020 Befindan Media