Louboutin Lost A Case To Stop Zara From Selling Red-Soled Shoes
His Fashion Blog
Posted on June 12, 2012
Last year, Christian Louboutin sued Yves Saint Laurent for “copying” their red-soled heels, and CL won the case. Still Ysl were allowed to sell their red-soled heels until the case was resolved. This time, Christian Louboutin sued the high street chain, Zara, for copying CL’s Yo Yo slingbacks:
(source)
Unfortunately for Christian Louboutin, the French court has ruled that Zara’s 10x cheaper version cannot be confused with the designer’s slingbacks. They do look similar in a way, but the difference is pretty obvious.
Louboutin claims that he has a trademark of the red-soles, because he “invented” them. I just don’t think you can own or invent a color… Louboutin however is not giving up, and still fighting for his “right” of the red-sole.
Is this the end of Louboutin’s fame? Is it the end of Louboutin’s red soles? Will we be seeing red-soled shoes all over the streets now? Only time will tell.
But until then, what do you think? Does Louboutin deserve the right of red-soled shoes, or are you teaming up with Zara? Let me know!
His Fashion Blog 
I think the red sole is Louboutin’s signature, so somehow it is ‘his’. But the difference between a Zara and a Louboutin shoe is pretty obvious, so I think you can’t forbid anyone to paint the soles red, but you can forbid someone to copy a design. So if you see the red sole as a ‘design part’ and not just a color, well, then it’s theft.
I think the red sole is a symbol, and as symbols are universal there can’t be any stealing. Too bad for Louboutin he made the red soles his trademark, but his shoes will always be recognizable by their creativity and refinement.
If other designers would do the same as Louboutin, all the leading fashion houses would be suing H&M, Zara, Mango and so on… and that’s not gonna work.
http://manonheine.wordpress.com
Hm, this is tricky…obviously Christian Louboutin has a reason to feel threatened, but you can’t copyright or lay claim to a color. I think there have been studies/surveys suggesting that consumers will buy the real deal after they see the quality of the knock-off…it might be more like a “gateway drug”, if that makes any sense? Louboutin should take advantage of this apparent demand and collaborate with Zara!
I love the red soles!!!
I think I’ll take a can of red spray paint to mine–even though they’ll look like nothing but a cheap knock-off.
I have a pair of shoes with a really nice printed fabric inside. I’m always casually kicking off my shoes so I can show off the insides.
Here is something that I learned in one of my business classes. When you buy the Private Selection soup at Kroger (which is Kroger’s house brand), it is made by Campbell on an assembly line that run’s parallel to the line that makes Campbell brand soup. Why? Because in Campbell’s marketing plan, if you are going to buy soup, you are going to buy Campbell’s-even if the profit margin is not as liberal.
It seems that if Christian Louboutin was smart, they would follow the same policy. Rather than sue someone for the color of the sole, market with them to provide the cheap knock-off. There will be those who will but the legit because they are fashion conscience, and then there will be those who hope to fool the rest with the cheap knock-offs. But last time I checked, some money coming in is better than wasting money on lawyers to lose anyway.
It’s so hard to create something that is not similar to something made before after so many shoes have been invented. I’m sure if we look through millions of old models , we’ll find similarities to Louboutin’ s shoes. It’s not easy to say I was the first to create this style. . Also, you cannot invent a color or. shape.
Exactly! Nobody in this world owns any color…
zara always “copies” other designers, and I agree that maybe it’s a little weird, sending someone to court for “copying” a color (which c.l does not own, or did not invent) however, the red sole is the trademark of Louboutin. Zara should respect that
Reblogged this on kalicouture and commented:
The red sole is the trademark
Ah, shoes….the love of my life, this post caught my eye as it is on a near and dear subject!! When it comes to High Street vs. Designer I think you can ALWAYS tell the difference between them, in the design, the cut, the quality etc. However, if other brands that stick buckles and prints on their shoes can have those trademarked then I don’t see why Louboutin can’t claim the red sole. He is not claiming ‘red’ he is claiming ‘red sole’, and I think he has a case in this instance – if he doesn’t fight every Tom, Dick and Aldo will be rushing to put red soles on their shoes and like it or not it will cheapen his brand.
There has always been a problem with copying designs and knock offs. It’s tough to choose a side because in the original designer’s perspective, it must be frustrating seeing your designs being stolen and cheapened. But everyone wants an affordable version too.
Great post! Christian Louboutins are a shoe dream for me, but I don’t have the $$ to fork over for a pair and probably never will unless I win the lottery. Therefore, I see no problem with knock-offs because it makes the trend affordable for people who can’t buy designer products.
I also think that anyone who knows anything about fashion, shoes especially, would easily be able to tell the difference between a pair of Louboutins and a pair of knock-offs such as the ones presented here by Zara. I think sueing is just taking the matter a little too far, no?
Agreed, but I also understand the way louboutin’s feeling. He can’t own or invent a color, but red soles has been his “thing” for so long, so I guess he’s taking a shot suing them.
Still it’s pretty obvious which is which!
I love Zara’s but the red bottom sole belongs to Louboutin and I cannot wait to own a pair!
I love them both as well, but I’m not as obsessed with louboutins anymore. I was really into the studs/spikes trend at first, but the current men’s shoes aren’t worth their price to me.
Doesn’t change the fact that his heels are absolutely fabulous!!
i love CL for his covetable red soles, but he needs to come off that high horse and give Zara a break! their slingbacks look nothing like his, and not everyone can afford to outfit their feet in $$$$$! team zara all the way!
CL is not the first shoe maker in the history who was making shoes with red soles. So all mumbling that they “invented” red soles is just mumbling. If the soles of his shoes had a certain pattern on them, then Zara copying the colour AND the pattern would be in deep poo. But just making shoes with red soles does not make them thieves. If I go outside and walk along my street (at least three shoe shops on 50 meters of the street), I’m pretty sure I will see shoes with red, turquoise, yellow and whatever soles. Not a pair of them being CL’s
Hiya, I was drawn to your blog through the ‘like’ on mine (thank you!) and before I write this I just want to put out there that I am in no way a fashionista and probably on those grounds (total lack of fashion knowledge really) have no right to comment! However, Louboutins are such a signature that even I know what the red sole means! I really love Zara, but shame on them for even trying to imitate. They have a different target market and should be confident enough in their own brand to come up with something different.
Your blog is fab by the way 🙂
Sam
red is my favorite color. i understand the desire to keep the red sole trademarked for the high end brand. and maybe zara isn’t trying to imitate, but be influenced by the artist. may she could do purple or hot pink instead of red…give it her own soul, pun intended. lol.
This battle is really silly, as a whole. However I think CL has the right to cop the red sole because the label has earned its right, plus what’s the point of red soles if its not the origional gangster!
Great Blog.
I’m gonna follow this blog.
My blog; http://www.nadernazemi.com
Thank you 🙂
Its not like CL is making these shoes for the regular people with regular income so why not have shoes similar to people who can afford the cheaper versions. I think CL should make a cheaper version of his shoe line for like a target or something like similar high end designers, how vera wang has a line at h AND M I think. Then it would have more of a case in court. But I don’t see why he is so mad when everyone cant afford his shoes in the first place. ijs… this is old but I wanted to comment hehe
Absolutely agree! He would’ve earned it had his line been a little more affordable, but it’s not.
Reblogged this on Ask Dagi. and commented:
I knew about this case! But I still love YSL coz they are much much more wearable as Louboutins, coz Louboutins hurt after 1 hour and YSL not!