Lovelyish

That freaking sucks; leave JoAnn Fabrics alone!!  Gee, I wonder which company has more financial clout and legal power…talk about not fair.

There are clear similarities.  I think they have a legitimate case.

why didn’t you post the picture from fashionindie?

this is CLEARLY an intentional rip of the coach logo. coach may be picking on the little guy, but they have a perfectly legitimate case.

I DO see the similarities but what is Coach afraid of? They think people will buy the fabric & make their own purses? LOL. Dont get me wrong, I love Coach but I think they’re being a bully now. Why dont they go after the people making counterfit bags? I dont hear much about them yet & all people do is brag about how they get those.

I really don’t see why Coach shouldn’t have sued Jo-Ann Fabrics, besides the fact that Coach is a much more profitable company. 

I don’t think it is bullying, but more like the “victim” pretending that they did nothing wrong when they are trying to copy another company’s famous logo. big or little profit, it is about principles. I think they were right to sue, because it would confuse and also cheapen their label. they even printed, “Coach est.1941″ on the right side on the pink section of the fabric, so clearly they are copycats trying to make a profit using a company’s trademark logo. if the nerdy unpopular girl did something wrong, I’m still going to call her out if there is evidence to prove her crime, and in this case, there is. I think they should also shut down those counterfeit purses,sunglasses,clothes,shoes and whatever other imitation products on the streets, too. I don’t support fake things. I mean if you had a company that you worked hard to start and developed a respectable/popular name in the fashion industry, and some people copied your design and marketed as their own, would you be okay with that?!

@Shinbi_Belldandy@xanga - i think coach should go after the canal street-types, but it’s a lot harder to go after individual vendors, especially when the source is overseas (specifically, in places where copyright laws aren’t taken seriously). jo-ann’s is not of the same echelon, but it is still a fairly large and profitable company – making it an easier target, and perhaps coach is trying to make an example of it. knock-offs cheapen a brand (not that coach is all that haute), but it’s one thing when shady street vendors try to hawk fakes. i doubt a company would accept a national chain deliberately knocking it off.

I definitely see the similarity.

I say it’s legit, definitelysimilar and the pattern even has Coach’s new trademark logo in it. Coach doesn’t want to ruin their image.

@MissPixieGlitter@xanga - True. Plus alot of the items sold on the street are actually coach bags that are stolen from overseas . they have the paper in there & everything, that’s why they tell you not to register a bag if you arent sure of the source. They could just serve Jo-Ann with a cease order to take the fabric off the market instead of suing them. Coach makes WAY more money than a fabric store so a huge lawsuit could shut them down. I like Jo-Ann’s so I’ll be sad to see it go. A good fabric store is hard to come by nowadays since people dont sew as much.

My friend once gave me a Coach wristlet that was real & I nearly died thinking she spent too much & I tried to politely give it back but she told me she went to a Coach outlet store & got it for like $45. Then she took me there last year & I fell in love. You can get offical Coach items for like 50% off or more! That’s gonna be one of my big stops when I go home for vacation! XD

is the rectangular picture at the top right under the title the fabric that jo-ann fabrics was trying to sell? cause if that is the it it says “coach est 1941″ in cursive black text on the fabric. sometimes my browser doesn’t load all the images and i overlook it so idk if that pic is the pic of the fabric that is the center of the problem

If the picture at the top is what is on Jo-Ann Fabrics’ fabric, then Coach def has a case ! And the ONLY reason people are saying “leave Jo-Ann Fabrics” alone is because they’re a small company. What if coach decided to print something that Jo-Ann Fabrics made?

Well, it works both ways. While Coach may be a lot larger and wealthier, it still is wrong to use another company’s trademark and there are definite similarities. Not to mention the top of the picture says “Coach Established 1941, so if that is what Jo-Ann Fabrics is selling there really isn’t an argument.

The top fabric says “Coach, est. 1941″ – did they really expect to get away with it?!

@lttlegel - the top pic is Coach…

@individually_surveys@xanga - that is the real* coach logo…

JoAnn elongated O – looks like any “knock off” coach fabric
Same thing goes for “G” aka “Goach” bags
Those that buy authentic Coach would be smart enough to tell a real coach bag apart from the fakes

@phuck_diz_shiz@xanga - I have “Goach” purse. My aunt bought it for me when I was 13 and I had no idea what Coach was or that I was carrying a knockoff. I don’t use it anymore out of shame. I am not into designer labels/brands and such, but I also think it’s ridiculous to be carrying around obvious knockoffs.

I can see where Coach is coming from. “Confusingly similar” is the basis for most trademark infringement lawsuits and it usually holds up in court.  It’s not like Coach is the first company to file such a lawsuit. Coca-Cola has done it as well as other major corporations.  It’s to protect the intellectual property of the people that put their time and money and hard work into developing their work. I’m a marketing major so this is something I know like the back of my hand.

Plus I hate when people rock hideous knock offs and try to act like they’re real.

http://www.styleite.com/retail/coach-sues-joann-fabrics/

This is a link to an article about it. The offending fabric is at the bottom and is clearly attempting to copy Coach’s signiture look.

Coach’s logo is ugly as shit anyway. The knock-off is usually an improvement.  :/

they look nothing alike ._.

They do have a legitimate reason. I know that if someone else took my or my company’s ideas or outright logo, I’d be pissed even if they had no power over me whatsoever. I’d sue them just for the hell of it since they were too dumb to think of their own design and resorted to stealing mine.

I don’t know what to really think. It’s difficult to say if Jo Ann Fabrics is copying coach but I do see fake designer bags everywhere.

@blackspiders@xanga - 

agreed

As long as it’s not an exact copy and you can circle the differences in the accused copy, Joann’s will win the case. This is if they have a good lawyer representing their company.

………………………..  it’s just a mod pattern.  everything from the 70′s had that pattern already.

Of course Coach has a legitimate case! They should go after Joann’s. Above all both of the manufactuers are BUSINESSES, and they need to look after the bottom line, esp. to make their stockholders happy. Doesn’t matter who makes more money, copyright infringement is copyright infringement.

Not unfair at all. I would sue too if I were Coach. 

I refuse to buy or use a coach bag because all the people I know who use them are snotballs about it.

oh yes, because people will get SO confused and coach will lose SO much money! :rolls eyes:

When I first read the story, I though that Coach was just picking on the smaller brand. Then I looked up the fake picture versus the real picture. 

JoAnns is obviously trying to rip off the coach logo, like they are almost exactly the same. 

haha, that’s true, nobody would mistake it for the real Coach.

@fashionsbyjulia@xanga - For it to hold up in court, it does not have to be exact. Confusingly similar would win the case for Coach hands down.

Yes. Plus, both pictures posted above are Coach.

They have every right to sue.

http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/thecut/2011/04/13/13_coachbag.o.jpg/a_250x375.jpg

The o’s look similar to the c’s, but they’re obviously NOT the c’s. 
If Coach wants to sue, why don’t they sue people who are actually selling knockoffs of coach bags?

Also, why would anyone spend that much on a purse? I don’t get it. I guess I’m just cool enough without snobby accessories. 

Why wouldn’t you post the real picture??

Strange..

I love Jo-Ann Fabrics =[

I think it’s legit

plus there’s a shit load of fake coach bags…why don’t they sue them??

the top people at coach are a bunch of faggots anyways trying to make a quick buck that they don’t need to bring more publicity to them

I don’t think it seems unfair at all. Coach has every right to sue them for copyright infringement.

I have an issue with Jo-Ann Fabrics anyway. I went there one time for fabric that I needed desperately and I have never been treated so rudely before in my life. I was yelled at to take a number while standing in a line of two people. I was so confused and shocked that the woman behind me skipped up to the ‘take-a-number’ machine before I could get to it and so I had to wait another 15 minutes before being helped. And when I eventually got to the desk the woman was practically snarling as she cut the fabric. I do not know what I did, but I know that I will never go back.

I know I got a little off topic, but if you ask me, it’s their bad karma. I’m rooting for Coach on this one…

Most people didn’t seem to think before they posted.  Shock and amazement.  The top imagine is not from Joann’s, it clearly says “Coach.”

This is the controversial print: http://www.joann.com/joann/catalog/productdetail.jsp?pageName=search&flag=true&PRODID=zprd_10048544a

There is certainly a similarity, but the design is so generic that I wouldn’t be surprised if it was coincidental.  Even if it isn’t, the damages that Coach is claiming (upwards of $2 million) is outrageous, typical of any copyright infringement case. 

There is no way that Coach lost sales because of this print, especially more than $2 million worth.  Do you think that the vapid brats that fork over hundreds of dollars for a purse are going to spend a few dollars on a yard of fleece and make their own knock-off Coach items?

You would have to be a moron to get this fabric confused for the real brand.  In short, I’m pulling for the “nerdy girl.”  Props to them for staying strong and not removing the fabric listing from their website.  Coach just wants to generate a little buzz and show people they’re not to be trifled with – it’s corporate play, not righteous indignation.

I’ve seen other rip-offs so why Jo-Ann Fabrics?

Really Coach?  Did you trademark a fucking letter?

people who shop coach, KNOW coach.
they sure as hell wouldn’t dish out the price of a real coach unless they’re in a damn store [or official website] and can PROBABLY tell the difference between C’s and O’s
just saying.

they just wanted to pick on the little guy.
but what makes it a tad worse is that it makes it seem like they’re picking on the little people in general too, so that they can’t even make something nice for themselves, if they want THAT LOOK they have to shop coach.

that’s mean to me.

@Crossed_Out_Name@xanga -  they’re website does say no longer available now

but it’s TRUE, the brats and people who can afford the real thing, wouldn’t be looking to make a knock off with a few yards of fabric. and if i read correctly it was a FLEECE material… coach doesn’t use that material (that i know of) especially for purses or shoes! it would probably have been used to make some stuffed animal or something to be sold at a craft fair.

ugh. coach made me mad -__- LOL.

JoAnn Fabrics is far from being a “small” company.  They have stores nationwide, and they are traded on the NYSE.

Regardless though – the only way to keep your trademark is to fiercely defend it, whether you think you’re going to win or not.  Going with a law suit puts Coach on record as defending their trademark, which lets them keep it. Fendi has sued Walmart, I think Coach has also sued Target… not unusual for companies to try to protect their brands.

As for the little guys selling knock off bags… it’s far easier for them to sue the city or local governments for allowing the fraudulent businesses to operate, so they use the government to pursue the little guys.