Anna Wintour, editor-in-chief of Vogue, at the ‘Channel Cruise 2017/2018 Collection’ at the Grand Palais on May 3, 2017 in Paris, France. The magazine is suing rappers Drake and 21 Savage for trademark infringement.
Image Pascal Le Segretain / Getty
hide captions
switch captions
Image Pascal Le Segretain / Getty
Anna Wintour, editor-in-chief of Vogue, at the ‘Channel Cruise 2017/2018 Collection’ at the Grand Palais on May 3, 2017 in Paris, France. The magazine is suing rappers Drake and 21 Savage for trademark infringement.
Image Pascal Le Segretain / Getty
Legal experts believe that the publisher of Vogue The magazine has a strong case in a trademark lawsuit that could cost rappers 21 Savage and Drake millions of dollars in damages.
In the days leading up to the duo’s collaboration album release, Her lossrappers 21 Savage and Drake shared photos of – and then went viral – fake copies Vogue featured them on the cover. In Monday, Vogue Condé Nast publishing house filed a 30-page lawsuit alleged that creating a “fake version of perhaps one of the most carefully curated covers in all of the publishing business” violated the media company’s trademark rights.
Condé Nast is now seeking at least $4 million in damages, or triple any profits from the album and counterfeits. Vogue problem.
“I think it’s an easy case for them to win,” said Barton Beebe, a law professor at New York University who specializes in intellectual property law. “And I think they’re going to get orders, relief orders, orders to stop the marketing campaign. To me, that seems like an interesting question to be if it’s going to be an interesting question.” Vogue want to pursue this by all means for damages, because they can amount to millions for this type of behavior. ”
With a lawsuit filed just days earlier, it’s hard to determine how the case might progress. One option for Condé Nast, according to Beebe, could be to file a temporary restraining order, or a preliminary order, in the following days to stop further fake advertising activities. Vogue Magazine. As of Wednesday afternoon, the original post on Drake’s Instagram page is now gone.
And because rappers have promoted parody content with other media entities – such as pretending to participate NPR Tiny Desk concert and a performance on Saturday night live – others may bring similar lawsuits.
“They’re just trying to sell something, and they’re making up fake news to do it,” Beebe said. “And so it would be understandable if the other goals of this media campaign align as well.”
However, rappers could argue that trademark law “has no specific protection,” according to Mark P. McKenna, a law professor at UCLA who specializes in intellectual property and privacy law.
“The basic idea of trademark infringement is that the plaintiff must demonstrate the possibility of confusion,” says McKenna. “And so what you see some courts sometimes say is, if the parody is clear, there won’t be any confusion because people will understand that it’s a parody.”
But the attention generated from the lawsuit could be a way to focus more on the album’s release.
“That’s part of the stunt, isn’t it?” McKenna said. “There’s a kind of calculated risk taken here. I mean, even if the court told them to stop doing this, like they’ve already done, they’ve attracted attention. I think that’s why Vogue trying to make money: make people suffer enough that they won’t do it. ”
This isn’t the first time a musician has recently faced a trademark infringement lawsuit while promoting a new release.
Nike sues brand MSCHF after it collaborated with rapper Lil Nas X about the Nike Air Max 97s modification to “Satan Shoes” sold around the same time the rapper released the single “Montero (Call Me By Your Name)” in 2021. After immediately stopping further sales of these shoes, Nike finally was settle the case with MSCHF.
