Kim Kardashian Sued By SKKN+ Proprietors For Trademark Infringement

Is all push great press? Not for Brooklyn-centered skincare business Attractiveness Principles working with its SKNN+ mark. None other than Kim Kardashian is the subject matter of a further contentious conversation. With the recent start of her skincare manufacturer SKKN By Kim, arrived criticism accusing Kardashian of stealing ‘SKKN’ title from black-owned magnificence manufacturers. Looking at Kardashian’s preceding encounters with accusations of appropriating other cultures, the failure to rebrand her new undertaking doesn’t come as a shock. In 2019, the town of Kyoto urged Kardashian to rethink the naming of her shapewear brand Kimono, explaining the cultural importance of the garment.

Shoppers to begin with likened SKKN By Kim to current brand name SKN by Lori Harvey. Nevertheless, public critique roiled social media and extended its attain to the courts—albeit with a various corporation completely, pitting Kardashian, her corporate entity Kimsaprincess Inc., and her cosmetics maker Coty, Inc., which holds a 20 per cent stake in Kardashian’s KKW Natural beauty, towards Magnificence Concepts LLC, a 4-year-old, a black- and female-owned, skincare organization performing business as SKKN+ that opened a brick-and-mortar locale right after surviving the pandemic.

In a new lawsuit in the Japanese District of New York, Attractiveness Principles v. Kim Kardashian et al., 1:22-cv-03797 (E.D.N.Y.) Splendor Concepts brings claims of trademark infringement and unfair competition, reverse confusion, unlawful misleading acts, and small business practices in violation of New York Gen. Bus. Regulation §349-50 and other linked claims from Kardashian and her fellow defendants in link with the SKKN by Kim brand and use of the marks on merchandise and solutions that the plaintiff says are “identical to, or remarkably similar to, products and services provided by Magnificence Concepts less than [its own] SKKN+ trademark.”

Splendor Concepts started using the SKKN+ mark in August 2018 for its skincare products and solutions and products and services. Beauty Principles statements that it learned of the defendants’ intention to launch a skincare line under the brand SKKN and/or SKKN BY KIM in or about July 2021 when Kardashian filed 17 trademark programs for SKKN BY KIM. On March 28, 2021, just two times right before Kardashian filed her very first “SKKN by Kim” purposes, Elegance Concepts filed its individual trademark software for “SKKN+.” Rising fears about Kardashian’s entry into the sector prompted Beauty Concepts to inquire Kim and her partners to “abandon their strategies to use a mark incorporating the most major things of Magnificence Concepts’ mark SKKN+, namely the letters ‘SKKN.’”

Just before bringing suit in the Eastern District, Natural beauty Ideas initiated opposition proceedings ahead of the USPTO’s Trademark Demo and Charm Board in December 2021 in an attempt to avert 4 of the defendants’ apps for the SKKN BY KIM mark from remaining registered by the trademark business office. In response, Kardashian’s attorneys attributed Beauty Concepts’ try to block Kardashian’s software to “the misguided idea [that Beauty Concepts] owns exceptional trademark legal rights to the expression ‘skkn’ for anything and anything natural beauty, beauty, hair or nail-connected.” Counsel for Kardashian ongoing by contending that the descriptive nature of the mark fails to justify unique rights, in particular in mild of the simple fact that “skkn” is merely a misspelling of the expression “skin.”

Even with the trademark programs delayed by the oppositions, Beauty Concerns contends that the SKKN BY KIM June 21st launch has by now damaged the tiny business. Mirroring the claims designed by manner model Rhode in the trademark lawsuit that it filed towards Hailey Bieber’s just lately launched skincare manufacturer less than the very same title, Rhode-NYC, LLC v. Rhodedeodato Corp. et al, 1:22-cv-05185 (S.D.N.Y.), Splendor Ideas asserts that the “prominent celebrity” status of Kardashian is set to “quickly overshadow[]” Attractiveness Concepts’ SKKN+, with Kardashian’s brand name “poised to earn hundreds of tens of millions of bucks in earnings beneath the infringing SKKN marks.”

In addition to the likelihood that the defendants have now prompted confusion as a end result of the similarity between the models and the items and providers they supply, Attractiveness Principles contends that the defendants are “further introducing to the probability of confusion” by “repeatedly us[ing] and emphasiz[ing] SKKN in their packaging and advertising and marketing.” For example, “the logo for the SKKN BY KIM brand name also closely emphasizes the term ‘SKKN’ and de-emphasizes the text ‘by Kim,’” therefore, “amplifying the chance of confusion involving the defendants SKKN brand and Beauty Concepts’ SKKN+ model.”

To realize success on its trademark infringement assert, Beauty Principles will have to set up that it has a legitimate mark entitled to defense the defendants utilized the exact same or a equivalent mark in commerce in connection with the sale or advertising of products or companies without Beauty Concepts’ consent and the defendants’ use is probably to induce confusion as to the affiliation, relationship or association of defendants with Splendor Concepts, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or acceptance of defendants goods’, products and services or business things to do by Elegance Ideas.

A chance of confusion exists concerning emblems when the marks are so equivalent and the items and/or companies for which they are utilised are so connected that buyers would mistakenly imagine that they occur from the identical supply. To establish whether or not a likelihood of confusion exists, the marks are examined for similarities and variations. The extent of that similarity—whether it’s primarily based on seem, overall look and/or meaning—“may be enough to help a finding of chance of confusion, depending on the relatedness of the merchandise and/or products and services.” In addition, courts use several factors to manual their analyses. The 2nd circuit, for example, analyzes the likelihood of confusion working with the aspects mentioned in Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elecs. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir. 1961). These aspects involve the strength of the senior user’s mark, similarity of the marks, similarity of the merchandise or products and services, likelihood that the senior consumer will bridge the hole and extend into the junior user’s product region, the junior user’s intent in adopting the mark, proof of precise confusion, the sophistication of the prospective buyers, high-quality of the junior’s merchandise or expert services, and associated items and companies.

Attractiveness Concepts statements the inescapable result of SKKN by Kim in the attractiveness market place is reverse confusion. Reverse confusion occurs when a massive, junior consumer saturates the current market, and their mark gets to be much more well known than the senior mark. While this declare is not especially frequent, it continues to be a person of the major fears for tiny business enterprise owners—especially in the beauty and retail industries. Splendor Concepts asserts that buyers expect “to acquire the defendants’ products and solutions bearing the infringing SKKN marks and/or products and services done working with these products from Splendor Principles.” Therefore, the defendants’ use of the allegedly infringing marks “has and will continue to impair the potential of Natural beauty Concepts’ buyers and potential customers to lookup and discover information about Natural beauty Ideas, its bodily site, the SKKN+ Expert services, and the SKKN+ site and online marketing and advertising.”

Elegance Principles notes the defendants’ now-intensely-followed social media accounts on platforms like Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok, which consist completely of the word @skkn with out the “by Kim” factor. In fact, “numerous social media end users have mistakenly tagged Magnificence Concepts’ @skknplus social media accounts when referencing” the defendants’ items. As a end result of major purchaser confusion, “Beauty Concepts’ presence on the world wide web has been overcome by Defendants’ marketing, and Splendor Principles has expertise[d] actual confusion in the form of people calling Magnificence Principles to check with if they are affiliated with the Defendants and their Infringing SKKN Marks.”

With the foregoing in mind, Attractiveness Concepts seeks injunctive reduction to bar the defendants from continuing to make use of the allegedly infringing SKKN by Kim branding, as perfectly as financial damages. Due to the fact the filing of the suit, Kardashian’s attorneys have put forth a statement negating the details underlying the dispute, stating they “we search forward to presenting our situation in court.”

 


©2022 Norris McLaughlin P.A., All Rights Reserved
Nationwide Regulation Overview, Volume XII, Number 203