MEXICAN COURT PILES ON THE AGONY FOR LEVI STRAUSS


Today's Daily Telegraph reports on a real disaster for jeans manufacturer Levi Strauss. Local police in Mexico City, pressured by one the company's lawyers, targeted a factory run by Mexican enterprise Comexma was suspected of producing fake goods. Local media were invited along to witness the raid. Comexma's factory was indeed producing Levi branded jeans, but that was just what it was supposed to be doing: it was one of Levi's own suppliers, legitimately producing clothes under licence from the US company. Comexma then sued Levi's, seeking compensation both for commercial loss and for damage to its reputation as a result of the raid. A court in Mexico City has now ordered Levi's to pay $24.5m in damages and lost income, plus a further $20.5m for harm to Comexma's reputation.

Levi's: is there a need to patch up its legal act in Mexico?

Levi has now admitted its mistake, claiming that its Mexican trade mark protection counsel failed to check with the company's US headquarters before proceeding. A Levi's spokesman is however reported as saying that the US company "strongly disagrees" with the court decision, against which it was appealing: the raid occurred after Levi Straus had told Comexma it was terminating its contract and the Mexican company was in the process of shutting down the facility. Levi Strauss said that, even if the damages awards stand, its operating income would be higher in the first quarter than during the same period last year.

The IPKat says this is a nightmare scenario which -- irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the Mexican court decision -- both should and could be avoided by adequate policing of licensees' activities. "I didn't know Mexican courts awarded such large sums by way of damages", adds Merpel. "Is it only because Levi Strauss is a US corporation, or would a similar award be made against a local business too?"

Levi's jeans and social responsibility here
Invention of Levi Strauss blue jeans here; swinging blue jeans here
Levi Strauss and the structural study of myth here
MEXICAN COURT PILES ON THE AGONY FOR LEVI STRAUSS MEXICAN COURT PILES ON THE AGONY FOR LEVI STRAUSS Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, March 09, 2005 Rating: 5

4 comments:

  1. Comment from Mexico We received this email today. Sorry about the technical problems posting, Juan -- your comments are always welcome, as is your support. Dear Jeremy/Ilanah,
    I have tried to post a comment on this particular blog; however it seems to be impossible to retrieve the comments window from the IP Kat web page.
    If it is convenient and possible from your end to post a comment, I would tell you that Mexican Courts, and particularly judges, award damages depending the size and origin of the company involved. The Mexican Law guarantees for damages at least 40% of the sale price of the counterfeit goods, so my guess would be that Comexma was a pretty large factory working on behalf of Levis.
    Street talk: About a year ago Levi’s changed its IP Law Firm in Mexico and I think this was the drop that “purred” the glass.
    Best regards, Juan (an avid IP Kat fan)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Informative blog about classfield.
    I will definately bookmark you. My site
    is about classfield
    You or your visitors might like it too!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sometimes, these gambles pay off, but there are occasions when they fail miserably,

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great blog! If anyone is interested in computer gateway feel free to come by my site and check it out. Thanks again!

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.