News, The Business
Bird Handbags is Now Called Liz Carey Handbags, Thanks to Juicy Couture’s Legal Department
By Lauren Sherman
A few months ago, Britt wrote a story about a small-but-successful label called Bird, launched in 2006 by Los Angeles-based handbag designer Elizabeth Carey.
After Juicy Couture launched its own label, also called Bird, in 2009, Carey’s name and sales were cannibalized. She first attempted to reach out to Juicy Couture founders Gela Nash-Taylor and Pamela Skaist-Levy informally about the issue, but soon enough Liz Claiborne, the conglomerate that currently owns Juicy Couture, was involved.
Carey was forced to sue the company. She told Britt in April that she wanted to accomplish only one thing: “I want people to support young designers. I trademarked my company and did everything I was supposed to do. It’s a good lesson for people who want to start a brand, to know this and know that it’s out there. A big conglomerate shouldn’t be allowed to do this.”
Yesterday, we were informed that Carey was forced to give up the fight. Her collection will re-launch as Liz Carey handbags this fall.
I spoke with Carey on the phone yesterday afternoon–she was at her showroom, selling off the last of the Bird-labeled items. While she obviously couldn’t go into great detail because of legal reasons, Carey did tell me that she settled with Claiborne. “The offered me an incredibly low settlement. It’s basically not that great, but it’ll pay off my legal fees,” she told me. “Liz Claiborne has quite a few lawyers on retainer. I’m paying for my own. Suing corporate America is just more than I could afford.”
Would she have won if it the case went to court? Quite possibly. But for Carey, it was no longer worth the fight. “I would have loved to have taken it to court, but it would have been so expensive,” she explained yesterday. “I wouldn’t have had the money to put out a collection.”
The good news? Carey’s eponymous collection will include classic Bird styles, with plenty of new designs mixed in. After all, this is a fresh start.
Carey sent a lovely goodbye letter to her loyal customers, which I’ve included below. She says of her new label, “If anyone wants that name, well they better give birth to it.”
Tags: Bird, Elizabeth Carey, Juicy Couture, Liz Carey, Liz Claiborne
Most Popular Stories
Comments [14]
Popular Stories
The 10 Best YouTube Hair Tutorials
The 10 Best YouTube Makeup Tutorials 
Fashion's Most Stylish Guys Give Mark Zuckerberg an (Almost!) Hoodie-Free Makeover for Facebook's IPO
Style and Substance: 10 Ladies Who Have Proven You Can Have Both
10 Beauty Boards You Should Be Following on Pinterest
This bothers me because I neglect to see where Liz Claiborne has a viable argument. If she did as she was supposed to, she has the name on lock. What she can't control is how her sales are effected by having a more popular brand sharing a similar name. They knew what they were doing. They knew they could drive her down if they dragged the process out knowing that it's be costly for her to continue to fight. That sucks.
This is the same thing that happened to Laura Poretzky's first swim line named James. James jeans was all over that shit like white on rice. That's when she decided to re-launch and expand as Abaete. Unfortunately, I'm sure there are many more cases like this.
Just gave me another reason to dislike Juicy!
I have alway thought Juicy was trashy and now I have another reason to stand by my conviction…I'm with you Rose.
I have alway thought Juicy was trashy and now I have another reason to stand by my conviction…I'm with you Rose.
Kudos to Carey for keeping up the fight for as long as she did. I'm not sure I'd have the stomach for that. Maybe the press will be good for sales? In any case I hope her new label thrives!
On my feed this comes up with an advert for Juicy Couture embedded in it! I feel really bad for this designer. It's frustrating that a large company can simply walk all over smaller companies' rights – it adds a different spin to the “adventures in copyright” debate, which is normally about smaller companies copying designs from more establoshed or high-profile brands. Of course large companies should defend their designs and brand name – but apparently it doesn't run both ways.
There was an article in the recent edition of the Washington Monthly that analyzed how big corporations are actually stifling job creation and entrepreneurship with their ability to outspend the competition. This is a perfect example of how a smaller firm with tighter budget constraints gets screwed by a multi-national which would never behave this way towards another company of its size (e.g. Ann Taylor, Talbots).
In terms of litigiousness irrespective of merit or relevance, the Scottish burger chain is king – litigating even the most unlikely and smallest enterprise who use the “M” name in their advertising (even when the trader actually is called that by birthright). They, and several other well known multi-nationals have taken the view that they will fight any supposed infringement of their copyright with total force and irrespective of cost (or cost-effectiveness).
This obviously extends to Juicy Couture's purloining of a successful, but niche trader's brand. They did it because they can. They can outspend and outlast their much smaller opposition. Their legal action is run by professionals, litigating does not erode their ability to continue the core, creative side of their enterprise.
For a small trader, the fees involved in dealing with such opponents are totally unviable, not to mention the amount of time and stress involved (which alone can decimate their business). Trying to see the matter through the courts can lead to financial and personal ruin – their lives are on the line, but the multinational plaintiff feels no pain at all. This is undoubtedly an unfair situation, but I am glad that Liz Carey was at least able to get a settlement to cover her costs to date and can now get on with what she is best at – designing.
Trading under her own name may be a better decision in the end, even though it was forced upon her. The only thing the outraged can do is not to patronise Juicy Couture as a matter of principle. I will certainly be looking at Liz's new collection with interest.
What do you expect from a company with “Couture” in it's name who made their $$ catering to the Lowest Common Denominator – plastering their name in French Terry on a lot of really fat asses???
The whole thing is disheartening, but the_dark_lady_2 nails it in the end.
Juicy Couture's line has been crappy for a long time so they can steal whatever name they want…it will still be crap.
Juicy Couture is such crap. Just another reason to dislike them and Claiborne brands
Best of luck to Carey. She is now starting her new brand line of bags. More power to her.
omg they're dicks. I hope you and your fresh start are a success and that no one interferes with your business, any person that has something great to offer should not be taken advantage of like this