Abercrombie & Fitch Threatens To Sue Merchants In Hollister, California For Trademark Infringement
Taking a page out of Monster Cable's playbook, Abercrombie & Fitch has threatened to sue merchants in Hollister, California who sell clothes bearing their town's name. A&F claims that local merchants putting "Hollister" on their clothes will confuse notoriously inept surfers who can't distinguish between a town and A&F's Hollister Co. line. So what happens if the locals defy the upscale bully? According to David Cupps, Abercrombie's general counsel and harasser-in-chief, "If they try, they would get a call and much more."
The controversy over the name heated up in 2006 when Stacey Crummett, chief executive of Hollister-based Rag City Blues, added the word "Hollister" to the label of her vintage bluejeans. In response to her trademark application, Abercrombie & Fitch attorneys sent her a letter alleging she was violating the company's trademark and threatening to sue.
Crummett, who runs the business with her husband, said she added the name simply to identify the location of her headquarters. But she backed down and removed the name from the labels.
"They are a lot bigger than us," she said. "I said, 'Let's just not argue.' "
Once word spread about Crummett's run-in with Abercrombie & Fitch, locals and city officials began to fume, saying that the clothing firm was preventing them from showing their hometown pride on T-shirts and jackets.
"To me, it's a bunch of baloney," said Raul Gonzalez, 70, working at his one-room barbershop on 6th Street. "We were here long before they thought of [the apparel line]."
Even students at Hollister's San Benito High School wonder if they are violating Abercrombie & Fitch's trademark by wearing shirts emblazed with the school nickname, the Hollister Haybalers.
Hollister City Attorney Stephanie Atigh insists that A&F's lawyers are wearing their turtlenecks a little too tight. "There is no way you can trademark Hollister, Calif.," she said. "It's a geographical place."
Hollister, Calif., is at odds with Abercrombie over name [The Los Angeles Times] (Thanks to Melisa!)
Post a comment
Comments:
I see a lot of hometown pride. This could definately be used against A&F resulting in and david & Goliath. I could see A&F getting their asses handed to them in court and possibly more (than the PR they just lost from being douchebags).
it's about 44 miles to the beach from Hollister so I always laugh when I see kids wearing the Hollister surf wear.
I hope the City of Hollister wins this. I'm sick of corporations trademarking common names, especially names of cities/towns.
My hometown of Tommy Hilfiger, OH runs into this crap all the time.
The only way they could be mistaken for each other would be if the town was a poorly lit confusingly laid out mess with loud music pumped in and no indication as to the city's name at the outer limits.
I don't quite see the problem in this case. A+F, learning of a trademark application for CLOTHING said that would be improper. Which it probably would. As to the [town] logos T-shirts and so forth, those are quite a different matter and A+F would be silly to go after those - but the company has not. Unlike Monster Cable®, which threatened job/resume-post site Monster® and others in a totally frivilous way.
If my name was Van Heusen and I tied to start a company selling shirts under that name I would be slapped down, and rightly so.
Just wait until A&F sues Rand McNally for putting "Hollister" on their maps.
@5h17h34d: So they deserve to be able to prevent an entire town from printing its own name on stuff? That's ridiculous. And the town was definitely there before A&F created Hollister brand...
I live in Hewlett and Hewlett-Packard never once bothered us about our school clothing. Granted, HP doesn't sell clothing.
@5h17h34d:
Uh, no. According to Wikipedia, the town of Hollister, California was originally established in 1868, whereas A&F established the "Hollister" brand in 2000. If A&F was so concerned about potential trademark infringement/confusion, then maybe they shouldn't have used the name of a California town for their "California lifestyle" brand. A&F has absolutely no right to tell people how they can and cannot use the name of THEIR town. If I were a resident of Hollister, I would feel insulted that A&F used my town's name to sell fake "surfer" clothes.
@jodles: Simmer. The comment just pointed out that nomatter how lame this is, Monster Cable is x268 lamer.
@Frequentlywrong: It's also full of hicks, rednecks, and farmers. Anyone who is from the area knows that it is decidedly uncool.
I can see, sort of, why monster would get mad at say monster mini-golf. (pause for flames directed at me) Ok but this is a tad redicilous.
Now depending on how she used Hollister on her jeans marketing, that might be reason to say something. But a T-shirt bearing the graphic above seems pretty straight forward.
What I mean is if she put something like "Rag City Jeans - Hollister CA" on the tag of her jeans... No problem. If she just used the word Hollister or something, that could be grounds for a cease and desist letter.
Don't get me wrong I do think its still a case of corporate bullying, but its still open to interpretation.
If they were around before A&F created Hollister perhaps they should do a counter-suit because A&F stole their idea. Or maybe the city could sue A&F for improperly using their city's name with out permission.
This is nonsense. A&F only stepped in to contest Crummet's own trademark claim. Note the "In response to her trademark application"... A&F needs to police its trademark to maintain its validity. This does NOT apply to use of Hollister, CA as a geographical term. By definition this is a descriptive use and not used in a trademark sense.
Trademark cases do not always follow common sense rules.
@scootinger: Which has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they decided to sell a line of clothes with their town's name on it long after the plaintiff-to-be introduced their line of clothing.
teqjack is damn near the only one with any reason here!
If y'all can't see the difference between incorporating a town or city with a name and selling a line of clothing with that name I feel sorry for you then.
A&F has a case whereas the city has none. Simple as that, and the courts will confirm this assuming it ever gets that far.
@PriceIsWrong: Are you suggesting that Abercrombie & Fitch are, in any way, homosexual? Puh leez.
Gotta love the conjunction of their "We're mad as hell that they appropriated our name" and "We're mad as hell that they won't put an outlet store in our town."... Smacks of the food tastes terrible and there isn't enough of it!
Hollister was viewed as the backwater sticks of Silicon Valley.
@scootinger: Regardless of who was "there first," A&F owns the trademark to sell clothing with the name on it.
Is it unfair? Maybe. Still, A&F isn't in the wrong here at all; they legitimately have a trademark and they can defend it. If you want to point fingers (and I know commenters here do), look to the folks who granted a trademark on a city name.
@jodles: funny. I see at least 2 posts saying "the town was there first!"
My winning argument in court would be "A&F's line of clothing was there first!" Who would ever expect a city to create a line of clothing! It's a city for chrissakes!
I can hear the judge now: CASE CLOSED! :)
I am guessing the name came out of a focus group in which they just ran down a list of California cities regardless of geography and they turned the stupid dial the furthest to the right for Hollister.
Highland, Hillsborough, Hollister, Holtville, Hughson.
My kid sister went through a An intolerable Abercrombie phase a few years ago and pointing out that Hollister was NOT in Orange County and was about as cool as Hickman Nebraska was a good way to get something thrown at me.
The only way I could see where there might be merit to A&F's claim if they can demonstrate that merchants in Hollister is purposely trying to confuse consumers into thinking they're purchasing Hollister brand clothing. It sounds to me like this exactly what is going on in this case.
Producing souvenir sweatshirts with the city name on them or wearing a high-school jacket with HOLLISTER on it would be a different circumstance entirely.
Perhaps Hollister, California should sue Abercrombie & Fitch for defamation of character.
Reading about this made me think about the town of Katonah, NY. When they heard that one of their new residents, some woman named Martha Stewart, filed a trademark for some "Katonah Collection" furniture, they filed an immediate lawsuit against her for infringing the name of the town. I believe the courts dismissed the trademark conflict once the town and Martha agreed to some terms. If Hollister, CA wanted to retain the name of their town on clothing, it would have been a stronger case for them if they protested the use of the name of their town before A&F distributed their clothing.
What's next, Paris Hilton suing Paris France?
What do Hollister the retailer and Hollister the town have in common?
I probably will never go to either in my lifetime.
What stinks even more is that A+F corporate is in Middle-of-Nowhere, OH. It's like someone in Kansas City starting a "New York, NY" clothing line.
The corporate mentality is very paranoid and pathetic.
@5h17h34d:
Actually there is a lot more that goes into that than just the name. If it were just the name then the city would have a case.
Does the clothing make an obvious attempt to rip off the "look" of the A&F line as well...If so then I think the judge would side with A&F.
YAYYYYY BROKEN REPLY COMMENTS...
AGAIN -__-
@5h17h34d: i can buy clothing that says "Myrtle Beach" and "Black Mountain", i once had a shirt that said "La Jolla"
i don't think the city has created a line of clothing, just clothes that have their name on them.
silver-bolt:
Mine's broken too. Sucks.
As for A+F, I wouldn't shop there at gunpoint. The clothes are overpriced, pretentious, and ugly.
I think the real crime here is having the city's high school nickname being the "Haybalers."
I am disappointed not to find a linked picture of Mike Jeffries looking ridiculous within these comments...
My ex went to San Benito High and graduated in "02, she sometimes wears her old P.E. clothes out in public and is asked where she got the shirt and sweats because they want their own pair. I lived in Hollister in "07 and the A&F clothes don't even begin to describe the culture there, straight farm town. A&F is ridiculous for pursuing any kind of copyright infringement.
Especially given where Hollister CA is. It is a cow-town in the middle of nowhere. Best known for being a cheap bedroom community in the 80's for South Silicon Valley.
Some very nice caves near there too, but no beach.
I am going to start a line of clothing called "Made in China" and then sue everyone in sight. Seems to me that's basically what this amounts to.
I wish that Hollister, Ca would grow out of its les/bi/gay-questioning phase and simply charge the Hell out of the closet. Their indecisiveness is giving us all blue balls.
Do the town fathers neuter brunettes?
Do they stand at the top of a towering cliff, a la 300, hurling the male babies lacking washboard abs down to the waiting, bloody rocks below?
Because if they do, I hope their lawyers look into that.
Unfortunately, I know a little TOO MUCH about Hollister Co...
Anyway, the name Hollister that the A&F company uses really doesn't have anything to do with the town Hollister, California at all. A&F's Hollister is named after a fictional ranch in Santa Barbara county where surfers know to go to get the best waves...or at least that's the basic gist of it. It's mostly trying to recapture the spirit of the backstory of where Abercrombie and Fitch takes its name, same with their more upscale brand Ruehl, also a fictional backstory.
I have a feeling, although I have never seen said apparel so I can't be sure, that the clothing manufacturers in Hollister, California are using designs and prints that do try to emulate the look of A&F's Hollister clothes.
Who really knows though.
I wish that stoopid people would stop paying out the ass for a tee shirt with a made up name on it Once that happens, then all this goes away.
When I started seeing people all over the place wearing shirts that said "Hollister," I thought it had something to do with the town. Like it was a bigger tourist destination than I thought or something. (It is a really nice little town, BTW).
Maybe municipalities should all trademark their names.
@5h17h34d: It's not a page out of Monster's book at all IMO. If you're curious as to a little bit of history on the A&F Hollister's name, check out my comment on page 2. I would have just replied it here but the comment reply button did not work at the time.
@gStein: the article says "The controversy over the name heated up in 2006 when Stacey Crummett, chief executive of Hollister-based Rag City Blues, added the word "Hollister" to the label of her vintage bluejeans. In response to her trademark application, Abercrombie & Fitch attorneys sent her a letter alleging she was violating the company's trademark and threatening to sue."
So, if you had actually read the article, you would see this became an issue when they started adding "Hollister" to the label of their product. If they were printing t-shirts that said Hollister on the front there would be no issue. The issue is by creating this label she DID in fact do just what you didn't think they did.
I'm no fan of Corporate America or A&F but this won't even make it to court because the defendant's lawyers would have to be incompetent to advise them that they can prevail.
I think hollister (the town) should sue for libel, by implying their town is all douches.
Wow... just wow. Another reason A+F sucks.