×
463
Fashion Jobs
MOLEDRO
Operation Manager
Permanent · NEW DELHI
MOLEDRO
HR &Admin
Permanent · NEW DELHI
MOLEDRO
Brand Manager
Permanent · NEW DELHI
MOLEDRO
sr Fashion Designer / Production Manager
Permanent · NEW DELHI
ADIDAS
Manager Information Security
Permanent · GURUGRAM
ADIDAS
sr. Manager Sales Excellence
Permanent · GURUGRAM
CL GUPTA RETAIL PRIVATE LIMITED
Production Manager Cum Quality Control Manager
Permanent · Noida
UGRAYA FOODS
Production Manager || Agartala (Tripura) || Poultry Feed Industry
Permanent · Agartala
GOVIND KRIPA INFRATECH PVT. LTD.
HR/Telecalling/Sales Manager/Sales Executives/Asst. Sales Manager
Permanent · Jaipur
JUMBO BAGS
Manager- Production (Fibc / Woven Polypropylene Industry)
Permanent · Chennai
ADIDAS
Manager, Masterdata And Product Launch (.Com & Digital Partners), Apac
Permanent · GURUGRAM
ADIDAS
Manager, Digital Backend Operations, Apac
Permanent · GURUGRAM
THE HOUSE OF DEEPTHI LIMITED
Production Manager
Permanent · MUMBAI
MANPOWERGROUP SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
Hiring-Field Sales Manager
Permanent · Chennai
YUTIKA NATURAL
Area Sales Manager (Guwahati)
Permanent · Katihar
LENSKART
Area Operations Manager
Permanent · Chennai
ELECTRONICA FINANCE
Area Sales Manager - Mumbai- Vasai
Permanent · Mumbai
ADIDAS
Manager Learning & Development & Knowledge Management (M/F/D)
Permanent · CHENNAI
D.LIGHT
Hiring For Area Sales Manager | Bihar | d.Light Energy
Permanent · Patna
CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED
Loan Against Securities - Area Sales Manager
Permanent · Chennai
ANAND RATHI GLOBAL FINANCE
Hiring For Area Sales Manager Sme- Lap
Permanent · Mumbai
CURLYFE BIOSCIENCES
Senior Area Sales Manager
Permanent · Ghaziabad
By
Reuters
Published
Aug 16, 2017
Reading time
2 minutes
Share
Download
Download the article
Print
Click here to print
Text size
aA+ aA-

Costco owes Tiffany $19.4 million for fake Tiffany rings: U.S. judge

By
Reuters
Published
Aug 16, 2017

A federal judge on Monday said Tiffany & Co may recover at least $19.4 million in damages from Costco Wholesale Corp over the warehouse club chain's illegal sale of counterfeit diamond engagement rings bearing the "Tiffany" name.


archiv


U.S. District Judge Laura Taylor Swain said Tiffany deserves $11.1 million, plus interest, representing triple the lost profit from Costco's trademark infringement, plus the $8.25 million in punitive damages awarded by a jury last October.

The Manhattan judge also permanently barred Costco from selling anything that Tiffany did not make as "Tiffany" products, unless it uses modifiers suggesting that the products have, for example, a Tiffany "setting," "set" or "style."
Costco did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Tiffany had sued Costco on Valentine's Day in 2013.

While the case concerned only about 2,500 rings, Tiffany sued to protect its brand and cachet as one of the world's best-known luxury retailers.

Tiffany last month named industry veteran Alessandro Bogliolo as its new chief executive, to help arrest declines in same-store sales as millennials spend elsewhere on accessories.

Costco had argued that "Tiffany" had become a generic term, excusing its use on a standalone basis.

But the judge found Costco's defenses "not credible," given evidence that displays of fine jewelry were a key part of the Issaquah, Washington-based company's marketing strategy.

Salespeople "described such rings as 'Tiffany' rings in response to customer inquiries, and were not perturbed when customers who then realized that the rings were not actually manufactured by Tiffany expressed anger or upset," Swain wrote.

Meanwhile, Costco's upper management "displayed at best a cavalier attitude toward Costco's use of the Tiffany name in conjunction with ring sales and marketing," the judge added.

The jury had awarded Tiffany $5.5 million rather than $3.7 million for lost profit. Swain found the lower sum sufficient.
Leigh Harlan, Tiffany's general counsel, in a statement said the decision "sends a clear and powerful message" to anyone seeking to infringe the New York-based company's trademark.

"We brought this case because we felt a responsibility to protect the value of our customers' purchases and to ensure that Costco's customers were not misled," she said.

The case is Tiffany and Co et al v. Costco Wholesale Corp, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 13-01041.

© Thomson Reuters 2022 All rights reserved.