As many of you guessed...
The Nina Ricci brand (Puig-Prestige Division) says it is taking legal action against the makers of a new fragrance called Twilight, which has been released in a red perfume bottle identical to the Nina by Nina Ricci flacon (pictured).
(via cosmeticnews) The Twilight bottle is shown at left, the Nina bottle is on the right.
I think they've got a pretty good case, there 🙂
Wow, never saw that one coming. 😉
Goodness, but why? I'm not sure I see the resemblance. 😉
Yay!
Wow; what a shocker…
Is twilight a tiny company? They may have purchased an end lot of bottles innocently. I think Nina Ricci should look at the supplier/manufacturer.
Twilight is a best-selling book that's just been made into a movie. Don't know who made the fragrance.
Everybody — I can't even begin to think of individual responses to your comments, LOL…this one is a no-brainer 🙂
I believe the technical legal term for the Nina Ricci lawyers would be:
“slam-dunk”
Wow! There could be some similarities but… just stealing the whole bottle from Nina Ricci? I am suprised they even went ahead and launched a perfume in an identical bottle like Nina Ricci, when it's the 21st century and even silly lawsuits are no longer suprising us.
Ha! Well, that was stupid, makers of Twilight. You got what was coming to you. This case will be an easy one to win.
bwahaha – I can't wait to see the lawyers try to argue that the Twilight bottle is slightly squatter, redder, and has words on it. You would think that they would have at least changed the cap and leaves – sheesh.
I don't blame Nina Ricci – Nina might not be the most innovative fragrance out there, but I sure wouldn't want to be associate with some cheesy teen movie tie-in if I were her.
This does sound more likely then just them releasing such a brazen copy.
This sounds awful!
A company as big as Nina should:
1) Fly the person that owns the right to merchandise(usually the writer, but sometimes the publisher) AND the provider making the fragrance FIRST CLASS to Paris, 4 nights at the Ritz.
2) Offer them to make a deal: perhaps a little percentage of each bottle sold? Perhaps tempting the owner of the fragrance to be lured away from the provider once the contract expires? Offer them a twilight frag with a bottle on a different colour for each of the characters!! THERE ARE BIG BUCKS TO BE MADE OUT OF THIS!!!
3) If they don't agree, sue their pants out!, then crank out Nina “Vamp” in a bottle with goth writing around the apple! 🙂
Hmmm- maybe it was a calculated publicity stunt – I am sure the buzz from the lawsuit will bring tons of free publicity to both perfumes and probably boost sales in each court…
Kaos, I agree with you! Particularly a behind the scenes deal so that an “upscale” company like Nina Ricci isn't associated with the “Hot Topics” of malls everywhere. But having Ricci reach out and create a merch deal with the Twighlighteers would basically have everyone involved dancing in money nonstop.
Damn. I wish I were a Nina Ricci lawyer. Then maybe I could afford a By Killian or two…
It was inevitable I think.
A friend/former college roommate is now the head attorney in intellectual property at an int'l fashion house. We had a long conversation about what he does and I'm surprised this case is getting this far — especially considering how *blatant* this is.
From what he explained to me, it usually just takes a well-written letter or two to get a company to cease and usually make a monetary settlement. Depends on how diplomatic the attorneys are though. Interesting stuff.
Believe it or not, they can lose the lawsuit. The bottle is not an exact copy. It may appear that way that they are visually the same bottle, but they are not. I am not a fan of either perfumes or brands. They are going to have to prove that the makers of Twilight set out to copy their bottle intentionally. Otherwise there is no case, much less a lawsuit that will go to trial.
As a school teacher, I always see students who “forget” to do their homework and just copy something out of a book, thinking that there is no possible way the teacher will know.
And I used to wonder what those students would become in real life…
Now i know: Research & Development for Twighligh!!!!!
perhaps Twilights suppliers gave them a “really good deal” and they didn't check out the current perfume market. When I first saw the ad, I thought perhaps they had just posted a random bottle, not the actual bottle of Twilight.
Well, I'll be darned. We NST fans are quite the astute bunch. We were all in a tizzy when we first saw the Twilight bottle. Now the plot thickens. lol
My boyfriend, who is a patent agent with the U.S. patent office, heard about this on some patent blog (and didn't tell me! even though I sent him the original post!). His thoughts are that the Nina Ricci bottle won't stand as any sort of trademark, it can't stand as an identifier for the brand in the same way that Mickey Mouse ears or the Coke bottle do. But they probably have a good case based on trade dress, the characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress). I think the bottle nicely meets the standards for protection. Why else do we have perfume bottles than to identify the juice inside? And didn't we all see the Twilight bottle and immediately think Nina Ricci? If they file under trade dress infringement the slight differences in the design shouldn't matter, and they can use all the original blog posts about how close the bottles are to support their claim. Although they may still lose, I have no idea what kind of precedent is out there.
This makes more sense, since it would seem unlikely that they would release a new fragrance in exactly the same bottle as Nina Ricci's. Since there are extremely small differences in the cap size and coloring between both, was it perhaps a preliminary design, first offered to Nina Ricci's company by a contractor? In that case, it might be a matter of distributing liability.
If Twilight sprays on without getting sticky, then, it's superior to the Nina Ricci, and ought to win. Jeez, I hate the feel of it. Tacky on the skin.
I was right! When the post went up for Twilight, I said Nina Ricci should sue. They listened to little ol' me. Insert sarcasm ; D
The people liscencing the Twilight name may have actually been unaware of the bottle issue. I can picture them just picking one of a hundred standard bottles that a far away factory makes. How did they know that factory happens to make knock offs of major perfume bottles for the international market? Ahh, the joys of globalization and manufacturing in China.
Wouldn't it be funny if they used the original blog entry and comments as evidence? 😀 “See, all these perfumistas immediately recognized the infringement!”
I think the pp who said it was a publicity stunt may have been on to something, though. I just find it impossible to believe that NO ONE involved knew of the NR bottle. I tend to live under a rock, hate shopping, lay no claims to being a perfumista, and even *I* knew the bottle.
LOL, too bad Hot Topic has done stuff like this before, steal artwork and/or sell stuff that has stolen artwork. FAIL.
Your boyfriend might want to check out Nina Ricci's perfume promotion and revise that statement. First of all, this is a trademark issue, not a patent issue. They are very different. The bottles for the Ricci perfumes are designed by Lalique. The esclusive design of their bottles is heavily promoted as part of their marketing for all of the scents: L'Air du Temps, Love in Paris, Premier Jour, Capricci, Farouche, Coeur Joie, Fille d'Eve and Nina.
Thir promotion includes comments like this one by Robert Ricci: “A perfume is a work of art, and the object that contains it must be a masterpiece.”
And this one:
A perfume is intimately tied to images that inspire dreams. Its bottle helps visualise the fragrance and triggers the imagination. The beauty, quality and sophistication of these original pieces comprise a unique collection in keeping with the finest French tradition of prestige perfume art and creation. Each piece is handcrafted using traditional crystal-making techniques: polishing, cutting, sand-etching to obtain effects of transparency, ground stoppers, etc.
Why would a Coke be able to trademark a bottle and not a perfume? As long as it's part of their marketing, and a strong part, even something less tangible than a bottle shape can be a registered trademark. Maker's Mark Bourbon won a trademark lawsuit over the red wax sealing the bottle cap because it is part of their packaging and such an extreme element of thir marketing image.
If Maker's Mark can win over red wax, Nina Ricci has a slam dunk with the whole bottle.
Nina Ricci's bottles are specially designed. I think they are even handmade. Given the marketing for Nina Ricci and other scents from the same house, it's highly unlikely that Nina Ricci's supplier would make such a glaring mistake.
Nina Ricci's markting includes comments like this one by Robert Ricci: “A perfume is a work of art, and the object that contains it must be a masterpiece.”
And this one:
A perfume is intimately tied to images that inspire dreams. Its bottle helps visualise the fragrance and triggers the imagination. The beauty, quality and sophistication of these original pieces comprise a unique collection in keeping with the finest French tradition of prestige perfume art and creation. Each piece is handcrafted using traditional crystal-making techniques: polishing, cutting, sand-etching to obtain effects of transparency, ground stoppers, etc.
Nina Ricci's bottle designs are by Lalique.
Why should Nina Ricci treat the people who have illegally use their bottle to a first class trip?
Why would Ninna Ricci want to be associated with a perfume sold at Hot Topic?
I can't imagine why Nina Ricci would want any kind of merchandise deal like this. They are a high-end product. Part of their marketing is exclusivity — in all of their scents.
Nina Ricci is a high-end product. Their target audince isn't the general public. They really don't have that much to gain from this kind of publicity. And if it were a mutually agreed-upon stunt, then Nina Ricci couldn't file a lawsuit.
Perhaps Nina Ricci wants to make it clear that there is no association. I'm sure for them, the disassociation is much more important than any money from a lawsuit.
I doubt if that's the case, given that Nina Ricci's markting includes comments like this one by Robert Ricci: “A perfume is a work of art, and the object that contains it must be a masterpiece.”
And this one:
A perfume is intimately tied to images that inspire dreams. Its bottle helps visualise the fragrance and triggers the imagination. The beauty, quality and sophistication of these original pieces comprise a unique collection in keeping with the finest French tradition of prestige perfume art and creation. Each piece is handcrafted using traditional crystal-making techniques: polishing, cutting, sand-etching to obtain effects of transparency, ground stoppers, etc.
I doubt if Hot Topic is selling anything packaged in handcrafted crystal.
I doubt if the packaging for Twilight is the same qulaity as the Nina Ricci. I can't imagine that it's a supplier issue. Here's why:
1. Nina Ricci's bottle designs are by Lalique. It's not a “standard design” — in fact, it's probabkly trademarked and copyrighted.
2. Nina Ricci's marketing includes comments like this one: A perfume is intimately tied to images that inspire dreams. Its bottle helps visualise the fragrance and triggers the imagination. The beauty, quality and sophistication of these original pieces comprise a unique collection in keeping with the finest French tradition of prestige perfume art and creation. Each piece is handcrafted using traditional crystal-making techniques: polishing, cutting, sand-etching to obtain effects of transparency, ground stoppers, etc.
That was my first thought, too; a manufacturing-level “uh-oh!” Someone sold the Twilight licensee some end-stock.
I'm skeptical–highly skeptical, given that I own a Nina bottle and have compared it to the Twilight photos online—that the Nina bottle is somehow so exclusive, so special, so Lalique (!) that the co. licensed to produce a Twilight perfume blatantly copied them.
My comment is meant to be in jest, don´t take me so seriously 😉
It's just that I'm in a “If God gives you lemons” kind of mood, so I was trying to look at a possible positive outcome instead of focusing in lawsuits! 🙂
I don't know about the thing of “not being associated to”.. in the end, in my opinion, luxury and exclusivity is when 1000 people out of 6 billion can have it, or when the item is hand-made.
When 3 out of 6 billion can have it if they want to, then you can say what you want, but that is not exclusivity, it is plain mainstream, even if the price is steep.
Kindest!
P.
Yep, it's being tossed right back at the manufacturer. http://www.shoppingblog.com/cgi-bin/sblog.pl?sblog=117097
I would laugh hysterically if it wasn't 11 at night right now..
a custom perfume bottle costs a fortune to make, and a custom bottle designer would know if a design was trademarked- it seems highly doubtful that the makers of the Twilight scent would have poured thousands and thousands of dollars to create a custom bottle exactly like Nina Ricci's bottle.
the theory about the manufacturer selling off an end lot or someone “finding” or “buying” some bottles and re-selling them to the Twilight people seems more likely. why risk a lawsuit? i'm sure if the bottles were made available to Twilight people as in, “here, look at this lovely apple shaped bottle, wouldn't it be perfect?” they said “perfect! we'll take them all”
Nina Ricci needs to look inside their organization and manufacturing to see who the thief is.
Don't really think it's more likely — I mean, you can see that it's made w/ cheaper materials than the original, so somebody would have had to copy it one way or the other…