I was surprised to see a full-page notice at the back of the June 14 edition of WWD. My first thought was that someone - some company - really angered CHANEL. Then I realized that we'd all better watch our language.The note "of information and entreaty to fashion editors, advertisers, copywriters, and other well-intentioned mis-users" of the CHANEL name" was eye-catching.
They started by describing their magnificent company, products, and registered trademark for fragrance, cosmetics, clothing, accessories, and other lovely things. Then...
Although our style is justly famous, a jacket is not "a CHANEL jacket" unless it is ours, and somebody else's cardigans are not "CHANEL for now."
And even if we are flattered by such tributes to our fame, as "Chanel-issime, Chanel-ed, Chanels, and Chanel-ized, PLEASE DON'T. Our lawyers positively detest them. We take our trademark seriously.
Wow! They should take their trademark seriously. The assaults on it from counterfeit merchandise continue to be troubling. However, going one step further, CHANEL believes that it's an infringement to modify the word "CHANEL" to describe non-CHANEL items. It's their trademark to protect, but I'm not sure that such comparisons can hurt them. Maybe in a full-page ad? I can understand that. Where to draw the line? I'd love to know who set them off.
Logo courtesy of CHANEL