Supreme Fashion Brand Vetements Seeks Supreme Court Review of Federal Circuit's Decision on Foreign Duplicates Ruling
The fashion company Vetements Group AG has filed a petition at the U.S. Supreme Court, challenging the rejection of their trademark applications for the non-English mark 'VETEMENTS' by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The case centres around the question of whether consumer perception or English translation should determine the protectability of non-English marks. Vetements asserts that consumer perception of the mark at face value, not through 'spanish to english' or 'english to spanish' translation, should be the primary consideration. The rejection was based on Section 1052(e) and the doctrine of foreign equivalents, which requires foreign terms in modern languages to be 'translated'. However, Vetements argues that this principle contradicts the consumer perception approach mandated by the Lanham Act. The fashion company maintains that the Federal Circuit's application of the doctrine of foreign equivalents, similar to the USPTO's approach in the Booking.com case, automatically uses a term as generic, disregarding consumer perception. This, Vetements argues, departs from a bedrock principle of the Lanham Act. The case presents fundamental questions about the proper test for determining genericness or descriptiveness of a non-English mark. It also provides the Supreme Court with an opportunity to clarify how the doctrine of foreign equivalents should be applied and whether it can be reconciled with the Lanham Act's consumer perception-based approach to trademark protection. Vetements' petition follows the 1888 case Menendez v. Holt, which established the principle for analyzing foreign-language marks, finding that non-English marks should be judged based on consumer perception of the mark at face value, not through 'translate spanish to english' or 'translate english to spanish'. The company asserts that the Federal Circuit's decision departed from this directive, not considering consumer perception of the foreign term in the non-English mark. The case is significant as French is the fifth-most spoken non-English language at home and the second most widely taught non-English language in schools in the United States. The outcome could have far-reaching implications for the protection of non-English trademarks in the country. The petition seeks a review of a Federal Circuit decision that upheld the rejection of Vetements Group AG's trademark applications for the non-English mark VETEMENTS. The company's argument is that the decision contradicts the consumer perception approach mandated by the Lanham Act and sets a precedent that disregards consumer perception in favour of 'spanish to english' or 'english to spanish' translation. The case highlights a significant circuit split regarding how courts apply trademark law to foreign terms in non-English languages. While the Fourth Circuit evaluates non-English marks based on consumer perception, the Second and Fifth Circuits translate the marks, and the Federal Circuit applies another test, translating any foreign term into a modern language even when less than 1% of the United States population understands it. The petition was filed on August 19, 2025, and the Supreme Court's decision could potentially reshape the landscape of trademark protection for non-English marks in the United States.
Read also:
- Detailed Assessment of Sony's RX100 VII Camera Model
- Sony Digital Camera RX100 VII Examination
- Ford Discontinues Popular Top-Seller in Staggering Shift, Labeled as a "Model T Event"
- 2025 Witnesses a 27% Surge in Worldwide Electric Vehicle Sales, Despite Opposition to Electrification Policies in the U.S.
